Article

In search of the perfect comorbidity measure for use with administrative claims data: does it exist?

Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195-4982, USA.
Medical Care (Impact Factor: 2.94). 09/2006; 44(8):745-53. DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000223475.70440.07
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Numerous measures of comorbidity have been developed for health services research with administrative claims.
We sought to compare the performance of 4 claims-based comorbidity measures.
We undertook a retrospective cohort study of 5777 Medicare beneficiaries ages 66 and older with stage III colon cancer reported to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program between January 1, 1992 and December 31, 1996.
Comorbidity measures included Elixhauser's set of 30 condition indicators, Klabunde's outpatient and inpatient indices weighted for colorectal cancer patients, Diagnostic Cost Groups, and the Adjusted Clinical Group (ACG) System. Outcomes included receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy and 2 year noncancer mortality.
For all measures, greater comorbidity significantly predicted lower receipt of chemotherapy and higher noncancer death. Nested logistic regression modeling suggests that using more claims sources to measure comorbidity generally improves the prediction of chemotherapy receipt and noncancer death, but depends on the measure type and outcome studied. All 4 comorbidity measures significantly improved the fit of baseline regression models for both chemotherapy receipt (baseline c-statistic 0.776; ranging from 0.779 after adding ACGs and Klabunde to 0.789 after Elixhauser) and noncancer death (baseline c-statistic 0.687; ranging from 0.717 after adding ACGs to 0.744 after Elixhauser).
Although some comorbidity measures demonstrate minor advantages over others, each is fairly robust in predicting both chemotherapy receipt and noncancer death. Investigators should choose among these measures based on their availability, comfort with the methodology, and outcomes of interest.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: William E Barlow, Jul 07, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
87 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Data from 8,032 Manitoba respondents to the 1996/97 Canadian National Population Health Survey were linked to the 1996 census to study whether measures of morbidity, both self-reported and objectively determined, were affected by neighbourhood context. Once age, gender, smoking status, diabetes, body mass index and individual income were added to individual and multi-level regression models, effects of various neighbourhood characteristics were attenuated and significant in relatively few cases. Caution is definitely called for in generalizing from studies based on one or two dependent variables. Weak relationships are likely to lead to contradictory findings with respect to the importance of neighbourhood effects.
    Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante 08/2010; 6(1):47-63. DOI:10.12927/hcpol.0000.21883
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare the ability of different models to predict prospectively whether someone will incur high medical expenditures. Using nationally representative data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), prediction models were developed using cohorts initiated in 1996-1999 (N=52,918), and validated using cohorts initiated in 2000-2003 (N=61,155). We estimated logistic regression models to predict being in the upper expenditure decile in Year 2 of a cohort, based on data from Year 1. We compared a summary risk score based on diagnostic cost group (DCG) prospective risk scores to a count of chronic conditions and indicators for 10 specific high-prevalence chronic conditions. We examined whether self-rated health and functional limitations enhanced prediction, controlling for clinical conditions. Models were evaluated using the Bayesian information criterion and the c-statistic. Principal Medical condition information substantially improved prediction of high expenditures beyond gender and age, with the DCG risk score providing the greatest improvement in prediction. The count of chronic conditions, self-reported health status, and functional limitations were significantly associated with future high expenditures, controlling for DCG score. A model including these variables had good discrimination (c=0.836). The number of chronic conditions merits consideration in future efforts to develop expenditure prediction models. While significant, self-rated health and indicators of functioning improved prediction only slightly.
    Health Services Research 04/2010; 45(2):532-52. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2009.01080.x · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Comorbidity has a well documented detrimental effect on cancer survival. However it is difficult to disentangle the direct effects of comorbidity on survival from indirect effects via the influence of comorbidity on treatment choice. This study aimed to assess the impact of comorbidity on colon cancer patient survival, the effect of comorbidity on treatment choices for these patients, and the impact of this on survival among those with comorbidity. This retrospective cohort study reviewed 589 New Zealanders diagnosed with colon cancer in 1996-2003, followed until the end of 2005. Clinical and outcome data were obtained from clinical records and the national mortality database. Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of comorbidity on cancer specific and all-cause survival, the effect of comorbidity on chemotherapy recommendations for stage III patients, and the impact of this on survival among those with comorbidity. After adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, area deprivation, smoking, stage, grade and site of disease, higher Charlson comorbidity score was associated with poorer all-cause survival (HR = 2.63 95%CI:1.82-3.81 for Charlson score > or = 3 compared with 0). Comorbidity count and several individual conditions were significantly related to poorer all-cause survival. A similar, but less marked effect was seen for cancer specific survival. Among patients with stage III colon cancer, those with a Charlson score > or = 3 compared with 0 were less likely to be offered chemotherapy (19% compared with 84%) despite such therapy being associated with around a 60% reduction in excess mortality for both all-cause and cancer specific survival in these patients. Comorbidity impacts on colon cancer survival thorough both physiological burden of disease and its impact on treatment choices. Some patients with comorbidity may forego chemotherapy unnecessarily, increasing avoidable cancer mortality.
    BMC Cancer 05/2009; 9(1):116. DOI:10.1186/1471-2407-9-116 · 3.32 Impact Factor