Skip to main content
Log in

Coding medical concepts:A controlled experiment with a computerised coding tool

  • Published:
International journal of clinical monitoring and computing

Abstract

In clinical routine there is a growing need to encode medical concepts with available standard coding systems. The coding process can be time consuming and may significantly add to daily paperwork, particularly regarding patients with multiple diagnoses and in busy clinical environments with a high turnover of patients. We have developed a generic computerised encoding tool — the PADS encoder — to ensure rapid, correct and complete coding of diagnoses in daily routine. The tool is integrated into an electronic patient record system (PADS, Patient Archiving & Documentation System) and takes full advantage of the user friendly Macintosh interface. The tool was tested in a controlled experiment by 18 clinicians who encoded a total of 666 medical concepts in each protocol (study protocol vs. control).

The following positive findings were significantly associated with the use of the computerised coding tool:

  • - the number of correctly encoded medical concepts was higher (99.55% vs. 86.1%)

  • - coding errors were lower (0% vs. 10.81%)

  • - more modifier codes were encoded correctly (increase by up to 43%)

  • - less coding errors were made (decrease by up to 43%)

  • - the overall rate of correctly encoded and complete main and modifier codes was increased by 31.27% (97.29% vs. 66.02%)

  • - coding time was reduced by 50%

This paper presents data to suggest that a computerised coding tool can produce more complete data of higher quality and can save time compared with the traditional approach to encode medical concepts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. International Classification of Disease. Basic tabulation list with Alphabetical Index. Ninth revision ed. 2 vols. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1978.

  2. Rothwell DJ, Hause LL. SNOMED and microcomputers in anatomic pathology. Med Inf (Lond) 1983; 8: 23–31.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. National Institute of Health: Unified Medical Language System. Fact Sheet, National Library of Medicine, 1989: 1–2.

  4. Klar R, Kaufmehl K. Die Qualität der Diagnosenstatistik nach der neuen Bundespflegesatzverordnung. In: Medizinische Informatik und Statistik (Herausgeber: K. Überla, O. Rienhof und N. Victor); Springer Verlag, 1988: 23–26.

  5. Hohnloser JH, König A, Fischer MR, Emmerich B. Data quality in computerized patient records: Analysis of a haematology biopsy report database. Int J Clin Monit Comp 1995; (accepted).

  6. Lloyd SS, Rissing JP. Physician and coding errors in patient records. JAMA 1985; 254 (10): 1330–1336.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hohnloser JH, Pürner F. PADS—A patient archiving and documentation system. Int J Clin Monit Comp 1992; 52 (11): 234–239.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Scriba PC, Mansky F, Fassl H, Friedrich HJ. Diagnoseschlüssel des Zentrums für Innere Medizin und des Medizinischen Zentrums 1. Auflage 1986.

  9. Nietzschke E, Wiegand M. Fehleranalyse bei der Diagnoseverschlüsselung nach ICD 9 gemäßde Bundespflegesatzverordnung. Z Orthop 1992; 130: 371–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hohnloser, J.H., Pürner, F. & Kadlec, P. Coding medical concepts:A controlled experiment with a computerised coding tool . J Clin Monitor Comput 12, 141–145 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02332688

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02332688

Key words

Navigation