Administrative Data in Cardiovascular Research—A Comparison of Polish National Health Fund and CRAFT Registry Data

Abstract

(1) Background: Administrative data allows for time- and cost-efficient acquisition of large volumes of individual patient data invaluable for evaluation of the prevalence of diseases and clinical outcomes. The aim of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of data collected from the Polish National Health Fund (NHF), from a researcher’s perspective, in regard to a cohort of atrial fibrillation patients. (2) Methods: NHF data regarding atrial fibrillation and common cardiovascular comorbidities was compared with the data collected manually from the individual patients’ health records (IHR) collected in the retrospective CRAFT registry (NCT02987062). (3) Results: Data from the NHF underestimated the proportion of patients with AF (NHF = 83% vs. IHR = 100%) while overestimating the proportion of patients with other cardiovascular comorbidities in the cohort. Significantly higher CHA2DS2VASc (Median, [Q1–Q3]) (NHF: 1, [0–2]; vs. IHR: 1, [0–1]; p < 0.001) and HAS-BLED (Median, [Q1–Q3]) (NHF: 4, [2–6] vs. IHR: 3, [2–5]; p < 0.001) scores were calculated according to NHF in comparison to IHR data, respectively. (4) Conclusions: Clinical researchers should be aware that significant differences between IHR and billing data in cardiovascular research can be observed which should be acknowledged while drawing conclusions from administrative data-based cohorts. Natural Language Processing of IHR could further increase administrative data quality in the future.