Evaluation of the Components of the North Carolina Syndromic Surveillance System Heat Syndrome Case Definition

Objectives: To improve heat-related illness surveillance, we evaluated and refined North Carolina’s heat syndrome case definition. Methods: We analyzed North Carolina emergency department (ED) visits during 2012-2014. We evaluated the current heat syndrome case definition (ie, keywords in chief complaint/triage notes or International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ ICD-9-CM] codes) and additional heat-related inclusion and exclusion keywords. We calculated the positive predictive value and sensitivity of keyword-identified ED visits and manually reviewed ED visits to identify true positives and false positives. Results: The current heat syndrome case definition identified 8928 ED visits; additional inclusion keywords identified another 598 ED visits. Of 4006 keyword-identified ED visits, 3216 (80.3%) were captured by 4 phrases: “heat ex” (n = 1674, 41.8%), “overheat” (n = 646, 16.1%), “too hot” (n = 594, 14.8%), and “heatstroke” (n = 302, 7.5%). Among the 267 ED visits identified by keyword only, a burn diagnosis or the following keywords resulted in a false-positive rate >95%: “burn,” “grease,” “liquid,” “oil,” “radiator,” “antifreeze,” “hot tub,” “hot spring,” and “sauna.” After applying the revised inclusion and exclusion criteria, we identified 9132 heat-related ED visits: 2157 by keyword only, 5493 by ICD-9-CM code only, and 1482 by both (sensitivity = 27.0%, positive predictive value = 40.7%). Cases identified by keywords were strongly correlated with cases identified by ICD-9-CM codes (rho = .94, P < .001). Conclusions: Revising the heat syndrome case definition through the use of additional inclusion and exclusion criteria substantially improved the accuracy of the surveillance system. Other jurisdictions may benefit from refining their heat syndrome case definition.