Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Research * Recherche

Common bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Ontario: Does ICD-9 coding indicate true incidence?

B. Taylor
CMAJ February 24, 1998 158 (4) 481-485;
B. Taylor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent reports in the scientific and lay press have suggested that bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy are common in Ontario. The reports were based on administrative data collected by hospital medical records departments and the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). The current study involved a direct inspection of hospital records to determine if the CIHI data accurately captured the rate of clinically significant bile duct complications. METHODS: For the period 1991 to 1995, records of bile duct injuries after laparoscopic cholecystectomy were independently evaluated to clarify the clinical significance of the complications. Of 21 Ontario hospitals for which data on complications had been reported in the media, 18 provided detailed information on all patients reported to have suffered bile duct complications classified by the hospital as "major". In addition, each institution provided information on a random sample of one-sixth of the patients who had suffered complications classified as "minor". The reviewer then examined each relevant hospital chart to assess the grade and significance of the reported complications. RESULTS: All 24 bile duct injuries classified by the hospitals as"major" were confirmed as major (clinically relevant) injuries. Of the 80 bile duct complications classified by the hospitals as "minor", 76 (95%) were irrelevant to patient outcome. The discrepancy between data collected and reported frequency of injury lies in the use of nonspecific coding methods. INTERPRETATION: The rate of significant bile duct injuries cannot be inferred from nonspecific codes taken from the International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, and presented in hospital discharge records. Therefore, such data must be interpreted with extreme caution.

  • Copyright © 1998 by Canadian Medical Association
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 158, Issue 4
24 Feb 1998
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Common bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Ontario: Does ICD-9 coding indicate true incidence?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Common bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Ontario: Does ICD-9 coding indicate true incidence?
B. Taylor
CMAJ Feb 1998, 158 (4) 481-485;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Common bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Ontario: Does ICD-9 coding indicate true incidence?
B. Taylor
CMAJ Feb 1998, 158 (4) 481-485;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Results of cholecystectomy without intraoperative cholangiography
  • Users guide to the surgical literature: how to use an article reporting population-based volume-outcome relationships in surgery
  • What's in a name? Reporting data from public institutions
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Incidence of tuberculosis among reported AIDS cases in Quebec from 1979 to 1996
  • Fatal work-related farm injuries in Canada, 1991-1995
  • Do physicians assess lifestyle health risks during general medical examinations? A survey of general practitioners and obstetrician-gynecologists in Quebec
Show more Research * Recherche

Similar Articles

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire