The comparative effectiveness of open vs. robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer remains a controversial debate in urology. Its evaluation has largely relied on observational studies using administrative claims.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
In this report, we compare the accuracy of ICD-9 procedure codes vs. an itemized charge description methodology before and after the introduction of an ICD-9 code specifically identifying RARP in October 2008. We find that prior to 2008, charge description and ICD-9 procedures codes were poorly correlated, whereas after 2008, they were highly correlated. These findings call for a cautious interpretation of comparative effectiveness studies of ORP vs. RARP relying on ICD-9 procedures codes, particularly before October 2008. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
BJU international. 2016 Jan 22 [Epub ahead of print]
Jeffrey J Leow, Steven L Chang, Quoc-Dien Trinh
Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, U. S. A. , Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, U. S. A. , Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, U. S. A.