Registration of acute stroke: validity in the Danish Stroke Registry and the Danish National Registry of Patients

Cathrine Wildenschild; Frank Mehnert; Reimar Wernich Thomsen; Helle Klingenberg Iversen; Karsten Vestergaard; Annette Ingeman; Søren Paaske Johnsen

doi:10.2147/CLEP.S50449

Registration of acute stroke: validity in the Danish Stroke Registry and the Danish National Registry of Patients

Cathrine Wildenschild, Frank Mehnert, Reimar Wernich Thomsen, Helle Klingenberg Iversen, Karsten Vestergaard, Annette Ingeman, Søren Paaske Johnsen

Department of Clinical Medicine

84 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The validity of the registration of patients in stroke-specific registries has seldom been investigated, nor compared with administrative hospital discharge registries. The objective of this study was to examine the validity of the registration of patients in a stroke-specific registry (The Danish Stroke Registry [DSR]) and a hospital discharge registry (The Danish National Patient Registry [DNRP]). Methods: Assuming that all patients with stroke were registered in either the DSR, DNRP or both, we first identified a sample of 75 patients registered with stroke in 2009; 25 patients in the DSR, 25 patients in the DNRP, and 25 patients registered in both data sources. Using the medical record as a gold standard, we then estimated the sensitivity and positive predictive value of a stroke diagnosis in the DSR and the DNRP. Secondly, we reviewed 160 medical records for all potential stroke patients discharged from four major neurologic wards within a 7-day period in 2010, and estimated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the DSR and the DNRP. Results: Using the first approach, we found a sensitivity of 97% (worst/best case scenario 92%-99%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 73%-84%) in the DNRP. The positive predictive value was 90% (worst/best case scenario 72%-98%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 62%-88%) in the DNRP. Using the second approach, we found a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 81%-96%) and 58% (95% CI 46%-69%) in the DSR and DNRP, respectively. The negative predictive value was 91% (95% CI 83%-96%) in the DSR and 72% (95% CI 62%-80%) in the DNRP. The specificity and positive predictive value did not differ among the registries. Conclusion: Our data suggest a higher sensitivity in the DSR than the DNRP for acute stroke diagnoses, whereas the positive predictive value was comparable in the two data sources.

Original language	English
Journal	Clinical Epidemiology
Volume	6
Pages (from-to)	27-36
Number of pages	10
ISSN	1179-1349
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S50449
Publication status	Published - 23 Dec 2013

Access to Document

10.2147/CLEP.S50449

Cite this

@article{08078920e097465789b2c85dcba0e83f,

title = "Registration of acute stroke: validity in the Danish Stroke Registry and the Danish National Registry of Patients",

abstract = "Background: The validity of the registration of patients in stroke-specific registries has seldom been investigated, nor compared with administrative hospital discharge registries. The objective of this study was to examine the validity of the registration of patients in a stroke-specific registry (The Danish Stroke Registry [DSR]) and a hospital discharge registry (The Danish National Patient Registry [DNRP]). Methods: Assuming that all patients with stroke were registered in either the DSR, DNRP or both, we first identified a sample of 75 patients registered with stroke in 2009; 25 patients in the DSR, 25 patients in the DNRP, and 25 patients registered in both data sources. Using the medical record as a gold standard, we then estimated the sensitivity and positive predictive value of a stroke diagnosis in the DSR and the DNRP. Secondly, we reviewed 160 medical records for all potential stroke patients discharged from four major neurologic wards within a 7-day period in 2010, and estimated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the DSR and the DNRP. Results: Using the first approach, we found a sensitivity of 97% (worst/best case scenario 92%-99%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 73%-84%) in the DNRP. The positive predictive value was 90% (worst/best case scenario 72%-98%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 62%-88%) in the DNRP. Using the second approach, we found a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 81%-96%) and 58% (95% CI 46%-69%) in the DSR and DNRP, respectively. The negative predictive value was 91% (95% CI 83%-96%) in the DSR and 72% (95% CI 62%-80%) in the DNRP. The specificity and positive predictive value did not differ among the registries. Conclusion: Our data suggest a higher sensitivity in the DSR than the DNRP for acute stroke diagnoses, whereas the positive predictive value was comparable in the two data sources.",

author = "Cathrine Wildenschild and Frank Mehnert and Thomsen, {Reimar Wernich} and Iversen, {Helle Klingenberg} and Karsten Vestergaard and Annette Ingeman and Johnsen, {S{\o}ren Paaske}",

year = "2013",

month = dec,

day = "23",

doi = "10.2147/CLEP.S50449",

language = "English",

volume = "6",

pages = "27--36",

journal = "Clinical Epidemiology",

issn = "1179-1349",

publisher = "Dove Medical Press Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Registration of acute stroke

T2 - validity in the Danish Stroke Registry and the Danish National Registry of Patients

AU - Wildenschild, Cathrine

AU - Mehnert, Frank

AU - Thomsen, Reimar Wernich

AU - Iversen, Helle Klingenberg

AU - Vestergaard, Karsten

AU - Ingeman, Annette

AU - Johnsen, Søren Paaske

PY - 2013/12/23

Y1 - 2013/12/23

N2 - Background: The validity of the registration of patients in stroke-specific registries has seldom been investigated, nor compared with administrative hospital discharge registries. The objective of this study was to examine the validity of the registration of patients in a stroke-specific registry (The Danish Stroke Registry [DSR]) and a hospital discharge registry (The Danish National Patient Registry [DNRP]). Methods: Assuming that all patients with stroke were registered in either the DSR, DNRP or both, we first identified a sample of 75 patients registered with stroke in 2009; 25 patients in the DSR, 25 patients in the DNRP, and 25 patients registered in both data sources. Using the medical record as a gold standard, we then estimated the sensitivity and positive predictive value of a stroke diagnosis in the DSR and the DNRP. Secondly, we reviewed 160 medical records for all potential stroke patients discharged from four major neurologic wards within a 7-day period in 2010, and estimated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the DSR and the DNRP. Results: Using the first approach, we found a sensitivity of 97% (worst/best case scenario 92%-99%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 73%-84%) in the DNRP. The positive predictive value was 90% (worst/best case scenario 72%-98%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 62%-88%) in the DNRP. Using the second approach, we found a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 81%-96%) and 58% (95% CI 46%-69%) in the DSR and DNRP, respectively. The negative predictive value was 91% (95% CI 83%-96%) in the DSR and 72% (95% CI 62%-80%) in the DNRP. The specificity and positive predictive value did not differ among the registries. Conclusion: Our data suggest a higher sensitivity in the DSR than the DNRP for acute stroke diagnoses, whereas the positive predictive value was comparable in the two data sources.

AB - Background: The validity of the registration of patients in stroke-specific registries has seldom been investigated, nor compared with administrative hospital discharge registries. The objective of this study was to examine the validity of the registration of patients in a stroke-specific registry (The Danish Stroke Registry [DSR]) and a hospital discharge registry (The Danish National Patient Registry [DNRP]). Methods: Assuming that all patients with stroke were registered in either the DSR, DNRP or both, we first identified a sample of 75 patients registered with stroke in 2009; 25 patients in the DSR, 25 patients in the DNRP, and 25 patients registered in both data sources. Using the medical record as a gold standard, we then estimated the sensitivity and positive predictive value of a stroke diagnosis in the DSR and the DNRP. Secondly, we reviewed 160 medical records for all potential stroke patients discharged from four major neurologic wards within a 7-day period in 2010, and estimated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the DSR and the DNRP. Results: Using the first approach, we found a sensitivity of 97% (worst/best case scenario 92%-99%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 73%-84%) in the DNRP. The positive predictive value was 90% (worst/best case scenario 72%-98%) in the DSR and 79% (worst/best case scenario 62%-88%) in the DNRP. Using the second approach, we found a sensitivity of 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] 81%-96%) and 58% (95% CI 46%-69%) in the DSR and DNRP, respectively. The negative predictive value was 91% (95% CI 83%-96%) in the DSR and 72% (95% CI 62%-80%) in the DNRP. The specificity and positive predictive value did not differ among the registries. Conclusion: Our data suggest a higher sensitivity in the DSR than the DNRP for acute stroke diagnoses, whereas the positive predictive value was comparable in the two data sources.

U2 - 10.2147/CLEP.S50449

DO - 10.2147/CLEP.S50449

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 24399886

SN - 1179-1349

VL - 6

SP - 27

EP - 36

JO - Clinical Epidemiology

JF - Clinical Epidemiology

ER -

Registration of acute stroke: validity in the Danish Stroke Registry and the Danish National Registry of Patients

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this