Development of an expert derived ICD-AIS map for serious AIS3+ injury identification.

Objective: The objective of the mapping project was to develop an expert derived map between the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) clinical modifications (CM) and the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) to be able to relate AIS severity to ICD coded data road traffic collision data in EU datasets. The maps were developed to enable the identification of serious AIS3+ injury and provide details of the mapping process for assumptions to be made about injury severity from mass datasets. This article describes in detail the mapping process of the International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and the International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes to the Abbreviated Injury Scale 2005, Update 2008 (AIS08) codes to identify injury with an AIS severity of 3 or more (AIS3+ severity) to determine 'serious' (MAIS3+) road traffic injuries.Methods: Over 19,000 ICD codes were mapped from the following injury categories; injury ICD-9-CM (Chapter 17) codes between '800 and 999.9' and injury ICD-10-CM (Chapter 19) 'S' and 'T' prefixed codes were reviewed and mapped to an AIS08 category and then relate the severity to three groups; AIS3+, AIS < =2 and AIS 9 (no-map). The mapping was undertaken by ICD coding experts and certified AIS specialists from Europe, North America, Australia and Canada in face-to-face working groups and subsequent webinars between May 2014 and October 2015. During the process, the business rules were documented to define guidelines for the mapping process and enable inter-rater discrepancies to be resolved.Results: In total 2,504 ICD-9-CM codes were mapped to the AIS, of which 780 (31%) were assigned an AIS3+ severity. For the16,508 ICD-10-CM mapped codes a total of 2,323 (14%) were assigned an AIS3+ severity. Some 17% (n = 426) and 27% (n = 4,485) of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes respectively were assigned to AIS9 (no-map) following the mapping process. It was evident there were 'problem' codes that could not be easily mapped to an AIS code to reflect severity. Problem maps affect the specificity of the map and severity when used to translate historical data in large datasets.Conclusions: The Association for the Advancement in Automotive Medicine, AAAM-endorsed expert-derived map offers a unique tool to road safety researchers to establish the number of MAIS3+ serious injuries occurring on the roads. The detailed process offered in this paper will enable researchers to understand the decision making and identify limitations when using the AIS08/ICD map on country-specific data. The results could inform protocols for dealing with problem codes to enable country comparisons of MAIS3+ serious injury rates.

Prominent Injury Types in Vehicle Underbody Blast.

BACKGROUND: To fully understand the injury mechanisms during an underbody blast (UBB) event with military vehicles and develop new testing standards specific to military vehicles, one must understand the injuries sustained by the occupants. METHODS: Injury data from Service Members (SM) involved in UBB theater events that occurred from 2010 to 2014 were analyzed. Analysis included the investigation of prominent skeletal and visceral torso injuries. Results were categorized by killed-in-action (n = 132 SM) and wounded-in-action (n = 1,887 SM). RESULTS: Over 90% (553/606 SM) of casualties in UBB events with Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2+ injury sustained at least one skeletal fracture, when excluding concussion. The most frequent skeletal injuries from UBB were foot fractures (13% of injuries) for wounded-in-action and tibia/fibula fractures (10% of injuries) for killed-in-action. Only 1% (11/1037 SM) of all casualties with AIS 2+ injuries had visceral torso injuries without also sustaining skeletal fractures. In these few casualties, the coded injuries were likely due to trauma from a loading path other than direct UBB loading. CONCLUSION: Skeletal fractures are the most frequent AIS 2+ injury resulting from UBB events. Visceral torso injuries are infrequent in individuals that survive and they generally occur in conjunction with skeletal injuries.

Evolution of the Abbreviated Injury Scale: 1990-2015.

OBJECTIVE: Although the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) was initially developed in the mid-1960s for tracking injury in automotive and aircraft crashes, it has grown to become an internationally recognized scoring system for a variety of traumatic injuries. This shift in focus and advances in organized medical care, combined with feedback from field use and outcome analysis, have resulted in several AIS updates and revisions. This article demonstrates how AIS codes and severities have changed over the last 25 years and investigates the effects of those changes. METHODS: Data from each version and update of the AIS dictionary (AIS 1990, AIS 1998, AIS 2005, AIS 2008, and AIS 2015) were analyzed for changes and shifts in injury descriptions, severities, and code counts. RESULTS: The number of AIS codes has increased to improve coding specificity and reliability for a growing number of injury types. There has also been a shift in severities, mainly within the moderate (AIS 2) to severe (AIS 4) range. AIS 1990 was the first version to utilize the 6-digit predot identifier, to add modifiers for pediatric injury, and to substantially expand brain injury codes. AIS 1998 added coding rules and guidelines throughout the dictionary and integrated the Organ Injury Scale scores. The AIS 2005 dictionary added over 400 codes and made significant changes throughout. Fewer changes were made in the AIS 2008 update. AIS 2015 includes descriptions for tissue injuries with loss of soft tissue that do not qualify as amputations, a need identified in military injury analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Each updated version of AIS reflects improving medical care and new advances in understanding, measuring, and documenting injury. AIS changes over time reflect its international and cross-domain utilization for describing injury severity and set the standard for how the world now studies traumatic injury.

Development of an expert based ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM map to AIS 2005 update 2008.

OBJECTIVE: This article describes how maps were developed from the clinical modifications of the 9th and 10th revisions of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) to the Abbreviated Injury Scale 2005 Update 2008 (AIS08). The development of the mapping methodology is described, with discussion of the major assumptions used in the process to map ICD codes to AIS severities. There were many intricacies to developing the maps, because the 2 coding systems, ICD and AIS, were developed for different purposes and contain unique classification structures to meet these purposes. METHODS: Experts in ICD and AIS analyzed the rules and coding guidelines of both injury coding schemes to develop rules for mapping ICD injury codes to the AIS08. This involved subject-matter expertise, detailed knowledge of anatomy, and an in-depth understanding of injury terms and definitions as applied in both taxonomies. The official ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM versions (injury sections) were mapped to the AIS08 codes and severities, following the rules outlined in each coding manual. The panel of experts was composed of coders certified in ICD and/or AIS from around the world. In the process of developing the map from ICD to AIS, the experts created rules to address issues with the differences in coding guidelines between the 2 schemas and assure a consistent approach to all codes. RESULTS: Over 19,000 ICD codes were analyzed and maps were generated for each code to AIS08 chapters, AIS08 severities, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) body regions. After completion of the maps, 14,101 (74%) of the eligible 19,012 injury-related ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes were assigned valid AIS08 severity scores between 1 and 6. The remaining 4,911 codes were assigned an AIS08 of 9 (unknown) or were determined to be nonmappable because the ICD description lacked sufficient qualifying information for determining severity according to AIS rules. There were also 15,214 (80%) ICD codes mapped to AIS08 chapter and ISS body region, which allow for ISS calculations for patient data sets. CONCLUSION: This mapping between ICD and AIS provides a comprehensive, expert-designed solution for analysts to bridge the data gap between the injury descriptions provided in hospital codes (ICD-9-CM, ICD-10-CM) and injury severity codes (AIS08). By applying consistent rules from both the ICD and AIS taxonomies, the expert panel created these definitive maps, which are the only ones endorsed by the Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine (AAAM). Initial validation upheld the quality of these maps for the estimation of AIS severity, but future work should include verification of these maps for MAIS and ISS estimations with large data sets. These ICD-AIS maps will support data analysis from databases with injury information classified in these 2 different systems and open new doors for the investigation of injury from traumatic events using large injury data sets.

New Methodology for an Expert-Designed Map From International Classification of Diseases (ICD) to Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 3+ Severity Injury.

OBJECTIVE: There has been a longstanding desire for a map to convert International Classification of Diseases (ICD) injury codes to Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) codes to reflect the severity of those diagnoses. The Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine (AAAM) was tasked by European Union representatives to create a categorical map classifying diagnoses codes as serious injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] 3+), minor/moderate injury (AIS 1/2), or indeterminate. This study's objective was to map injury-related ICD-9-CM (clinical modification) and ICD-10-CM codes to these severity categories. METHODS: Approximately 19,000 ICD codes were mapped, including injuries from the following categories: amputations, blood vessel injury, burns, crushing injury, dislocations/sprains/strains, foreign body, fractures, internal organ, nerve/spinal cord injury, intracranial, laceration, open wounds, and superficial injury/contusion. Two parallel activities were completed to create the maps: (1) An in-person expert panel and (2) an electronic survey. The panel consisted of expert users of AIS and ICD from North America, the United Kingdom, and Australia. The panel met in person for 5 days, with follow-up virtual meetings to create and revise the maps. Additional qualitative data were documented to resolve potential discrepancies in mapping. The electronic survey was completed by 95 injury coding professionals from North America, Spain, Australia, and New Zealand over 12 weeks. ICD-to-AIS maps were created for: ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM. Both maps indicated whether the corresponding AIS 2005/Update 2008 severity score for each ICD code was AIS 3+, 1/2, or indeterminable. Though some ICD codes could be mapped to multiple AIS codes, the maximum severity of all potentially mapped injuries determined the final severity categorization. RESULTS: The in-person panel consisted of 13 experts, with 11 Certified AIS specialists (CAISS) with a median of 8 years and an average of 15 years of coding experience. Consensus was reached for AIS severity categorization for all injury-related ICD codes. There were 95 survey respondents, with a median of 8 years of injury coding experience. Approximately 15 survey responses were collected per ICD code. Results from the 2 activities were compared, and any discrepancies were resolved using additional qualitative and quantitative data from the in-person panel and survey results, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Robust maps of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM injury codes to AIS severity categories (3+ versus <3) were successfully created from an in-person panel discussion and electronic survey. These maps provide a link between the common ICD diagnostic lexicons and the AIS severity coding system and are of value to injury researchers, public health scientists, and epidemiologists using large databases without available AIS coding.