Reliability of International Classification of Disease-9 Versus International Classification of Disease-10 Coding for Proximal Femur Fractures at a Level 1 Trauma Center

J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020 Jan 1;28(1):29-36. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00874.

Abstract

Introduction: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid services proposed that transitioning from the 9th to the 10th revision of the International Classification of Disease (ICD) would provide better data for research. This study sought to determine the reliability of ICD-10 compared with ICD-9 for proximal femur fractures.

Methods: Available imaging studies from 196 consecutively treated proximal femur fractures were retrospectively reviewed and assigned ICD codes by three physicians. Intercoder reliability (ICR) was calculated. Collectively, the physicians agreed on what should be the correct codes for each fracture, and this was compared with coding found in the medical and billing records.

Results: No significant difference was observed in ICR for both ICD-9 and ICD-10 exact coding, which were both unreliable. Less specific coding improved ICR. ICD-9 general coding was better than ICD-10. Electronic medical record coding was unreliable. Billing codes were also unreliable, yet ICD-10 was better than ICD-9.

Discussion: ICD-9 and ICD-10 lack reliability in coding proximal femur fractures. ICD-10 results in data that are no more reliable than those found with ICD-9.

Level of evidence: Level I diagnostic.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Electronic Health Records
  • Femoral Fractures / classification*
  • Femoral Neck Fractures / classification*
  • Humans
  • International Classification of Diseases / standards*
  • Medicare
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Trauma Centers
  • United States