摘要
目的研究全世界已有的手术及操作分类系统,为国家选择统计信息的工具提供依据。方法本研究分别介绍了美国为配套ICD-10疾病分类与编码而配套研发的国际疾病分类第十版操作编码系统(ICD-10-PCS)、世界卫生组织牵头制作的健康干预国际分类(ICHI)和中国医疗服务操作分类与编码(CCHI)三套分类系统的特点、编码规则及分类轴心。并根据分类目的、应用范畴、临床适用性和操作便捷性等几个方面对ICD-10-PCS、ICHI和CCHI这三个分类系统以及ICD-9-CM3进行比较。结果ICD-10-PCS、ICHI和ICD-9-CM3都是基于医疗临床的分类系统,ICD-10-PCS覆盖范围更广、ICHI则更为基础,ICD-9-CM3的临床适用性最强。CCHI的服务目的主要为医疗收费。结论建议国家在选择手术及操作分类的信息收集工具时,维持现状使用ICD-9-CM3,或一步到位使用ICHI。若频繁的更换信息收集工具,势必会造成信息的不稳定。不建议使用CCHI作为医疗临床信息的收集工作。
Objectives To provide policy evidence to national statistic of health intervention information by investigating major operation and procedure classification systems worldwide. Methods The study compared the features, coding rules and classification axis of ICD-10-PCS, ICHI and CCHI, and interpreted the three classifications and ICD-9-CM3 from the aspects of objectives, applications, clinical using and operative convenience. Results The iCD-10-PCS, ICHI and ICD-9-CM3 are all classification systems based on clinical interventions. ICD-10-PCS covered a wide range compare with the other two systems. The context of ICHI is basic and junior. The clinical application of ICD-9-CM3 is strong compared with the other two systems. Besides, the objective of CCHI is for health intervention charge. Conclusions ICD-9-CM3 should be used continually for collection health intervention information before there would be a classification consistently used around the world. If the tool of information collection changes without preparation, there would be disruption of information on using historical data. The result of the study did not recommend using CCHI to collection clinical health intervention data.
出处
《中国病案》
2015年第9期29-32,共4页
Chinese Medical Record
关键词
分类系统
干预
手术及操作分类
Classification systems
Intervention
Operation and procedure classification
