Biopsy - Other - code not available
Legacy Content
This page contains Legacy Content.
- Explanation: was old diagnosis coding situation
- Successor: Biopsy (endoscopic), Biopsy (non-endoscopic)
Click Expand to show legacy content.
Contents
CCMDB currently only codes the biopsies listed in Category:Biopsy (old).
Endoscopies might include Biopsies
Biopsies might be done in the process of doing an endoscopy, so the diagnoses in Category:Endoscopy (old) should be included if we ever get a request for "all biopsies".
Should more be coded?
I have been finding that there are many patients that have various biopsies done that we can't code. Is this information useful for our data base? And if so, my suggestion is to code all other biopies under 848 - 14 ( under Post-op Surgeries - Other )--FLindell 15:26, 16 April 2009 (CDT)
- Good question and suggestion. Thank you Fran. The more specific the DX code is the better. Grouping under "Other" tends to be a mixed bag of information that is not really clear and I have found that this has ended up not being that useful. (we have a number of these types of code already). Adding more doesn't make the database better the key is the improve the quality and consistency of items we are currently collecting.
- Good to bring up to discuss, but I think coding this as other is of very limited value. Either let's code it right, or let's not code it. I think we should bring Julie in on this. Has anyone requested biopsy info in the past? Does it have a bearing on our reports? Actually, this goes further - does Julie find the "other" categories useful from a data mining perspective? Is there value in these? Maybe things should be coded under the master code of something, unless specific info is known, in which case they would move to a sub-diagnosis. I will email Julie to request her input on this article. Ttenbergen 13:34, 20 April 2009 (CDT)
- keep in mind if we add a Dx code to the database to track it will take number of years to accumulate enough information before you can see any useful information. --TOstryzniuk 18:20, 16 April 2009 (CDT)
- Haven’t had any database request specifically asking ‘Biopsies’ – can’t say if this will be requested in the future. However on the question about coding “OTHER ….” , if it happens as primary reason for admission, it will appear in the periodic reports as ‘OTHER … “ since only the main code is being presented – which may not be informative to the reader. However the OTHER category becomes useful when both main and subcode are together (except for those with subcode 90 - other) - I have used them in database request when filtering the population being requested. Also they are being used in consistency checks. Let me check the frequency of OTHER category (main with subcode) so we have numbers. This is part of the QA Frequency analysis I will do. Regarding adding new subcode, we always add new ones prospectively, aren’t we? Does adding ‘Other Biopsies’ be treated differently? Although the big question is how much more (specifics) should be added. I agree that we rather focus our efforts on quality than quantity. I am not sure what are the criteria (medically) of those under OTHERS. But I think to have them on separate ORGAN category is better than putting them just in one GENERAL OTHERS category.--JMojica 09:26, 23 April 2009 (CDT)
Reporting of diagnoses
As per statistician in Biopsy - Other", just putting it here since we don't have much info on these reports... "“OTHER ….” , if it happens as primary reason for admission, it will appear in the periodic reports as ‘OTHER … “ since only the main code is being presented – which may not be informative to the reader."
- we have a lot of diagnoses lumped together in "other" maindiagnoses that are not really that much related. is reporting them as a lump a problem? Ttenbergen 23:15, 2012 November 1 (EDT)