Validity of the International Classification of Diseases 10th revision code for hyperkalaemia in elderly patients at presentation to an emergency department and at hospital admission

OBJECTIVES Evaluate the validity of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) code for hyperkalaemia (E87.5) in two settings: at presentation to an emergency department and at hospital admission. DESIGN Population-based validation study. SETTING 12 hospitals in Southwestern Ontario, Canada, from 2003 to 2010. PARTICIPANTS Elderly patients with serum potassium values at presentation to an emergency department (n=64 579) and at hospital admission (n=64 497). PRIMARY OUTCOME Sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value and negative-predictive value. Serum potassium values in patients with and without a hyperkalaemia code (code positive and code negative, respectively). RESULTS The sensitivity of the best-performing ICD-10 coding algorithm for hyperkalaemia (defined by serum potassium >5.5 mmol/l) was 14.1% (95% CI 12.5% to 15.9%) at presentation to an emergency department and 14.6% (95% CI 13.3% to 16.1%) at hospital admission. Both specificities were greater than 99%. In the two settings, the positive-predictive values were 83.2% (95% CI 78.4% to 87.1%) and 62.0% (95% CI 57.9% to 66.0%), while the negative-predictive values were 97.8% (95% CI 97.6% to 97.9%) and 96.9% (95% CI 96.8% to 97.1%). In patients who were code positive for hyperkalaemia, median (IQR) serum potassium values were 6.1 (5.7 to 6.8) mmol/l at presentation to an emergency department and 6.0 (5.1 to 6.7) mmol/l at hospital admission. For code-negative patients median (IQR) serum potassium values were 4.0 (3.7 to 4.4) mmol/l and 4.1 (3.8 to 4.5) mmol/l in each of the two settings, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Patients with hospital encounters who were ICD-10 E87.5 hyperkalaemia code positive and negative had distinct higher and lower serum potassium values, respectively. However, due to very low sensitivity, the incidence of hyperkalaemia is underestimated.