Zusammenfassung
Ziel: Untersucht wurde, welche Codierungen der Demenzdiagnose im Verlauf des Inzidenzjahres
in der vertragsärztlichen Versorgung vorgenommen werden.
Methodik: 1848 inzidente Demenzpatienten, die in 2004 ≥ 65 Jahre alt und in der Gmünder ErsatzKasse
Mitglied waren. Angewandt wurden Methoden der deskriptiven Statistik.
Ergebnisse: Die Codierpraxis ist in 27 % der Fälle ein sehr variantenreicher Prozess. Dies gilt
für Hausärzte und Nervenärzte.
Schlussfolgerung: Analysen von Vertragsarztdiagnosen unterhalb des Oberbegriffs Demenz sind dementsprechend
mit großer Vorsicht zu betrachten.
Abstract
Objective: On the basis of data from one German Sickness Fund we analyzed which medical discipline
coded the incident diagnosis of dementia in ambulatory medical care in Germany, which
type of dementia was coded and how the initial code eventually changed during the
year of incidence.
Methods: Claims data of 1,848 insured people aged ≥ 65 years in 2004 with incident dementia
were analyzed by means of descriptive statistics.
Results: The diagnosis within the first quarter of the incidence year was coded by the GP
in 71 %, by a psychiatrist or neurologist in 14 %, by both in 6 % and by other disciplines
in 9 % of the cases. The percentage of unspecified diagnoses was 62 % among GPs and
46 % among psychiatrists or neurologists, a number differing largely from epidemiological
studies. In 27 % of the cases patients received two or more different dementia diagnoses
during the incidence year.
Conclusion: Studies and care concepts regarding dementia on the basis of diagnosis codes in ambulatory
claims data should be interpreted with great caution.
Schlüsselwörter
Demenz - Alzheimer-Krankheit - Diagnose - vertragsärztliche Versorgung - Codierung
Keywords
dementia - Alzheimerʼs disease - ambulatory medical care - diagnosis - claims data