Health Care Procedures

Summary

Background: ICD is used for coding medical diagnoses across the world, but there is no globally accepted coding system for health care procedures. The need for the introduction of a common international medical procedure classification has been addressed by the Australian NCCH, which proposed the International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI) as the basis of an international procedure classification. In parallel, the French multiaxial Classification Commune des Actes Médicaux (CCAM) has been established.

Objectives: The aim is to compare ICHI to the CCAM architecture and to assess their appropriateness for supporting international comparability of procedure data and give a recommendation for the further development of international procedure classifications.

Methods: The architecture of both ICHI and CCAM was thoroughly analyzed. ICHI classes were mapped to the classes of the multiaxial CCAM basic coding tables. This was done manually by domain experts, which analyzed the exact wording of each ICHI title. The result was assessed in terms of representability and granularity.

Results: 78.4% of ICHI classes could be mapped directly to CCAM. The anatomical site could be represented in 99.3%. Numerous ICHI classes combined anatomical sites requiring more than one CCAM code. Problems arouse due to imprecise ICHI descriptions. Conclusions: CCAM appeared as the more elaborate and mature system whereas ICHI had some drawback regarding ambiguity and varying granularity. It is recommended to improve the structure of ICHI by the beneficial aspects of the CCAM and to avoid semantic ambiguities by applying ontological principles and logic-based representation languages.

Keywords

Medical classification systems - classification methods - health interventions - medical procedures

• References

• 1 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/icd9/abticd9.htm. Last accessed 07/2008.
• 2 OPS-301 Operationenschlüssel nach § 301 SGB V. Version 2.0 und Version 2.1, DIMDI. http://www.dimdi.de.
• 3 Classificatie van Medisch Specialistische Verrichtingen (CMSV), Netherlands. http://www.cbv.nl. Last accessed 07/2008.
• 4 Averill RF, Mullin RL, Steinbeck BA, Goldfield NI, Grant TM. Development of the ICD-10 Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS). 3M HIS Working Paper 5-98, Wallingford. ICD-10-PCS on line: http://ncvhs.hhs.gov/020409p2.pdf. Last accessed 07/2008.
• 5 CCI Canadian Classification of Health Interventions, Canadian Institute for Health Information. http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPagejsp?cw_page=codingclass_cci_e. Last accessed 07/2008.
• 6 Classification des Actes Médicaux, Version V0bis, 2001: Guide de Lecture – Système de Codification. http://www.atih.sante.fr/?id=0003200001FF. Last accessed 01/2009; CCAM Version V13 (2008): http://www.codage.ext.cnamts.fr/codif/ccam/index_presentation.php?p_site=AMELI. Last accessed 01/2009.
• 7 Trombert-Paviot B, Rodrigues JM, Rogers JE, Baud R, van der Haring E, Rassinoux AM, Abrial V, Clavel L, Idir H. GALEN: A third generation terminology tool to support a multipurpose national coding system for surgical procedures. Int J Med Inf 2000; 58-59: 71-85.
• 8 International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI), Alpha Version (Trial Version). Current version (renamed as Condensed Classification of Health Interventions) on line: http://nis-web.fhs.usyd.edu.au/ncch_new/2.14.aspx. Last accessed 01/2009.
• 9 CEN ENV 1828 Health Care Informatics, Structure for classification and coding of surgical procedures. Brussels, December 1995
• 10 Hanser S, Zaiss A, Jakob R, Klar R. How to build a well structured procedure classification from an insufficient coding system. In: Fieschi M, Coiera E, Jack LI Y-C. (eds). Proceedings of the IIth World Congress on Medical Informatics (Medinfo 2004); September 7-11, 2004, San Francisco; p 1628. ISBN 158603-4448. Also available on CD.
• 11 Ingenerf J, Giere W. Concept oriented Standardization and Statistics oriented Classification: Continuing the Classification versus Nomenclature Controversy. Methods Inf Med 1998; 37 (4–5): 527-539.
• 12 Rosse C, Mejino JLV. A reference ontology for bioinformatics: the Foundational Model of Anatomy. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2003; 36: 478-500.
• 13 Schulz S, Hahn U, Rogers J. Semantic Clarification of the Representation of Procedures and Diseases in SNOMED((R))CT. Stud Health Technol Inform 2005; 116: 773-778. PMID: 16160352.
• 14 Baader F. The Description Logic Handbook, 2nd edition: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press; 2007
• 15 Spackman KA, Reynoso G. Examining SNOMED from the Perspective of Formal Ontological Principles: Some Preliminary Analysis and Observations. First International Workshop on Formal Biomedical Knowledge Representation KR-MED 2004. Whistler, Canada: 1.6.2004, pp 72-80) http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-102/spackman.pdf. Last accessed 01/2009.
• 16 Albrecht Zaiß, Susanne Hanser, Niklas Baerlecken. Comparison of ICHI and CCAM Basic Coding System. http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/meetings/tokyomeeting/documentlist.htm. Last accessed 05/2009.
• 17 WHO Family of Classifications Network Meeting Trieste 2007, Executive Summary. http://www.who.int/classifications/network/WHOFIC2007%20-%20A006%20-%20Executive%20Summary.pdf. Last accessed 01/2009.
• 18 International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI). http://www.who.int/classifications/ichi/en/. Last accessed 01/2009.