These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The reliability of the ICD-AIS map in identifying serious road traffic injuries from the Helsinki Trauma Registry.
    Author: Airaksinen NK, Heinänen MT, Handolin LE.
    Journal: Injury; 2019 Sep; 50(9):1545-1551. PubMed ID: 31371171.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: The EU has recommended that its member countries compile statistics on the number of serious road traffic injuries. In Finland, the number of seriously injured road traffic patients is assessed using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) and the automatic conversion tool (ICD-AIS map) developed by The Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine (AAAM). The aim of this study was to assess how reliably the ICD-AIS map identifies both serious injuries and seriously injured patients due to road traffic accidents. METHODS: Data was derived from the Helsinki Trauma Registry (HTR) and included 215 severe (New Injury Severity Score >15) trauma patients injured in road traffic accidents from the years 2016 and 2017. The severity ratings of injuries (Abbreviated Injury Scale, AIS 3+) and patients (Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale, MAIS 3+) were determined by direct AIS coding of the HTR and were also generated by the ICD-AIS map based on ICD-10 injury codes. These two ratings were compared by injury mechanism and Injury Severity Score (ISS) body regions. The strength of agreement was described using Cohen's κ. The most common injury codes with errors in severity rating by the ICD-AIS map were presented. RESULTS: The number of seriously injured patients by the ICD-AIS map was 21% lower, and the number of serious injuries was 36% lower than the corresponding numbers by direct coding. The exact agreement of the injury ratings was 72% (κ = 0.44, 95% CI 0.42-0.46). Most of the conversion errors were due to the simplicity of the ICD-10 codes used in Finland compared to those used in the ICD-AIS map (ICD-10-CM) and the missing codes from the ICD-AIS map. The most frequent misclassifications were due to multiple rib fractures, visceral organ injuries, some open fractures of extremities, and specific head injuries. Missing codes were most common in face, chest, and limb injuries. CONCLUSIONS: The ICD-10 injury codes presently used in Finland should be more specific to permit reliable conversion results by the ICD-AIS map. The problem with missing codes should be considered more closely. When implementing the ICD-11, all detailed injury codes should be introduced.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]