Evaluation of comorbidity indices for inpatient mortality prediction models

被引:28
作者
Martins, Monica
Blais, Regis
机构
[1] Escola Nacl Saude Publ Sergio Arouca, Dept Adm & Planejamento Saude, BR-21042210 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
[2] Univ Montreal, Fac Med, Dept Adm Sante, Grp Rech Interdisciplinaire Sante, Montreal, PQ H3C 3J7, Canada
关键词
administrative database; Charlson comorbidity index; inhospital mortality; risk adjustment; validation;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.11.017
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objectives: The objectives of the current study were: to compare the predictive capacity of the original Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), the CCI with new assigned diagnostic codes and estimated weights, and a new developed comorbidity index in a Brazilian population; and to study the effect of the number of comorbidity diseases recorded on the predictive capacity of the comorbidity indices. Materials and Methods: The study was limited to the Ribeirao Preto region in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil, from January 1996 to December 1998. We included only admissions in which the principal diagnoses were respiratory and circulatory diseases. Results: Evaluation of the CCI indicates that revision of the clinical conditions studied by Charlson, as well as their weights, increased mortality model predictive capacity. The C statistic was 0.72 for the original CCI, and increased to 0.74 for the CCI with new weights and 0.76 for the new index. The C statistic increases in all the comorbidity indices with the utilization of more diagnostic information. This impact is greater when a second secondary diagnosis is added. Conclusions: The results of the validity analysis for comorbidity indices favor the utilization of empirically developed indices. However, the increase in predictive capacity was weak. In addition, age and principal diagnosis are the most important predictors of inpatient mortality. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:665 / 669
页数:5
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 2003, RISK ADJUSTMENT MEAS
[2]
VALIDATION OF A COMBINED COMORBIDITY INDEX [J].
CHARLSON, M ;
SZATROWSKI, TP ;
PETERSON, J ;
GOLD, J .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1994, 47 (11) :1245-1251
[3]
A NEW METHOD OF CLASSIFYING PROGNOSTIC CO-MORBIDITY IN LONGITUDINAL-STUDIES - DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION [J].
CHARLSON, ME ;
POMPEI, P ;
ALES, KL ;
MACKENZIE, CR .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1987, 40 (05) :373-383
[4]
Evaluation of two competing methods for calculating Charlson's comorbidity index when analyzing short-term mortality using administrative data [J].
Cleves, MA ;
Sanchez, N ;
Draheim, M .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 50 (08) :903-908
[5]
How to measure comorbidity: a critical review of available methods [J].
de Groot, V ;
Beckerman, H ;
Lankhorst, GJ ;
Bouter, LM .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 56 (03) :221-229
[6]
ADAPTING A CLINICAL COMORBIDITY INDEX FOR USE WITH ICD-9-CM ADMINISTRATIVE DATABASES [J].
DEYO, RA ;
CHERKIN, DC ;
CIOL, MA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1992, 45 (06) :613-619
[7]
Practical considerations on the use of the Charlson comorbidity index with administrative data bases [J].
DHoore, W ;
Bouckaert, A ;
Tilquin, C .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1996, 49 (12) :1429-1433
[8]
DHOORE W, 1993, METHOD INFORM MED, V32, P382
[9]
Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data [J].
Elixhauser, A ;
Steiner, C ;
Harris, DR ;
Coffey, RN .
MEDICAL CARE, 1998, 36 (01) :8-27
[10]
Searching for an improved clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data [J].
Ghali, WA ;
Hall, RE ;
Rosen, AK ;
Ash, AS ;
Moskowitz, MA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1996, 49 (03) :273-278