Predicting Mortality and Healthcare Utilization with a Single Question

Section of General Internal Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA.
Health Services Research (Impact Factor: 2.78). 08/2005; 40(4):1234-46. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00404.x
Source: PubMed


We compared single- and multi-item measures of general self-rated health (GSRH) to predict mortality and clinical events a large population of veteran patients.
We analyzed prospective cohort data collected from 21,732 patients as part of the Veterans Affairs Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP), a randomized controlled trial investigating quality-of-care interventions.
We created an age-adjusted, logistic regression model for each predictor and outcome combination, and estimated the odds of events by response category of the GSRH question and compared the discriminative ability of the predictors by developing receiver operator characteristic curves and comparing the associated area under the curve (AUC)/c-statistic for the single- and multi-item measures.
All patients were sent a baseline assessment that included a multi-item measure of general health, the 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short Form (SF-36), and an inventory of comorbid conditions. We compared the predictive and discriminative ability of the GSRH to the SF-36 physical component score (PCS), the mental component score (MCS), and the Seattle index of comorbidity (SIC). The GSRH is an item included in the SF-36, with the wording: "In general, would you say your health is: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor?"
The GSRH, PCS, and SIC had comparable AUC for predicting mortality (AUC 0.74, 0.73, and 0.73, respectively); hospitalization (AUC 0.63, 0.64, and 0.60, respectively); and high outpatient use (AUC 0.61, 0.61, and 0.60, respectively). The MCS had statistically poorer discriminatory performance for mortality and hospitalization than any other other predictors (p<.001).
The GSRH response categories can be used to stratify patients with varying risks for adverse outcomes. Patients reporting "poor" health are at significantly greater odds of dying or requiring health care resources compared with their peers. The GSRH, collectable at the point of care, is comparable with longer instruments.

Full-text preview

Available from:
  • Source
    • "Individuals’ subjective satisfaction with their lives may be referred to as subjective quality of life, although it needs to be recognized that all quality of life measures are subjective to some extent and that there are no universally accepted definitions of such terms [5,6]. Both health-related quality of life and subjective quality of life have been found to be strongly predictive of more objective indices of health status, including chronic disease and mortality, as well as health service utilization, hence their utility as measures of disease burden [7-9]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In order to elucidate the individual and community health burden of body dissatisfaction (BD), we examined impairment in quality of life associated with BD in a large, general population sample of women. Self-report measures of BD, health-related quality of life (SF-12 Physical and Mental Component Summary scales) and subjective quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF Psychological Functioning and Social Relationships subscales) were completed by 5,255 Australian women aged 18 to 42 years. Most participants (86.9%) reported some level of dissatisfaction with their weight or shape and more than one third (39.4%) reported moderate to marked dissatisfaction. Higher levels of BD were associated with poorer quality of life for all items of both quality of life measures, the degree of impairment being proportional to the degree of BD. Associations were strongest for items tapping mental health and psychosocial functioning, although greater BD was associated with substantially increased risk of impairment in certain aspects of physical health even when controlling for body weight. Post-hoc analysis indicated that the observed associations between BD and quality of life impairment were not accounted for by an association between BD and eating disorder symptoms. In women, BD is associated with marked impairment in aspects of quality of life relating to mental health and psycho-social functioning and at least some aspects of physical health, independent of its association with body weight and eating disorder symptoms. Greater attention may need to be given to BD as a public health problem. The fact that BD is "normative" should not be taken to infer that it is benign.
    BMC Public Health 10/2013; 13(1):920. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-13-920 · 2.26 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Three measures of access, all derived from the patient survey, were used: 1) First Contact Access (four questions from the PCAT that measure access to the source of care during office hours and when the office is closed), and 2) First Contact Utilization (three questions from the PCAT that address the extent to which primary care is the first source of care for various types of health problems) and 3) Number of primary care visits to that practice over the past year (self-reported) (see Table 1). The First Contact Access and First Contact Utilization measures are answered using a 5 item Likert scale (items include: definitely, probably, probably not, definitely not and not sure/don’t remember) [15,16]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Immigrants make up one fifth of the Canadian population and this number continues to grow. Adequate access to primary health care is important for this population but it is not clear if this is being achieved. This study explored patient reported access to primary health care of a population of immigrants in Ontario, Canada who were users of the primary care system and compared this with Canadian-born individuals; and by model of primary care practice. Methods This study uses data from the Comparison of Models of Primary Care Study (COMP-PC), a mixed-methods, practice-based, cross-sectional study that collected information from patients and providers in 137 primary care practices across Ontario, Canada in 2005-2006. The practices were randomly sampled to ensure an equal number of practices in each of the four dominant primary care models at that time: Fee-For-Service, Community Health Centres, and the two main capitation models (Health Service Organization and Family Health Networks). Adult patients of participating practices were identified when they presented for an appointment and completed a survey in the waiting room. Three measures of access were used, all derived from the patient survey: First Contact Access, First Contact Utilization (both based on the Primary Care Assessment Tool) and number of self-reported visits to the practice in the past year. Results Of the 5,269 patients who reported country of birth 1,099 (20.8%) were born outside of Canada. In adjusted analysis, recent immigrants (arrival in Canada within the past five years) and immigrants in Canada for more than 20 years were less likely to report good health compared to Canadian-born (Odds ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.36,0.92 and 0.81, 95% CI 0.67,0.99). Overall, immigrants reported equal access to primary care services compared with Canadian-born. Within immigrant groups recently arrived immigrants had similar access scores to Canadian-born but reported 5.3 more primary care visits after adjusting for health status. Looking across models, recent immigrants in Fee-For-Service practices reported poorer access and fewer primary care visits compared to Canadian-born. Conclusions Overall, immigrants who were users of the primary care system reported a similar level of access as Canadian-born individuals. While recent immigrants are in poorer health compared with Canadian-born they report adequate access to primary care. The differences in access for recently arrived immigrants, across primary care models suggests that organizational features of primary care may lead to inequity in access.
    BMC Family Practice 12/2012; 13(1):128. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-13-128 · 1.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In fact, the number of OEF/OIF veterans rating their overall health as fair or poor doubled six months after returning home as compared to their initial post-deployment assessment [2]. This is concerning because lower self-assessed functional health, particularly in the physical domain, has been associated with both greater health care utilization and mortality in veterans of prior conflicts [4-6] and in community samples [7,8]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background High rates of mental health disorders have been reported in veterans returning from deployment to Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom: OEF) and Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom: OIF); however, less is known about physical health functioning and its temporal course post-deployment. Therefore, our goal is to study physical health functioning in OEF/OIF veterans after deployment. Methods We analyzed self-reported physical health functioning as physical component summary (PCS) scores on the Veterans version of the Short Form 36 health survey in 679 OEF/OIF veterans clinically evaluated at a post-deployment health clinic. Veterans were stratified into four groups based on time post-deployment: (1Yr) 0 – 365 days; (2Yr) 366 – 730 days; (3Yr) 731 – 1095 days; and (4Yr+) > 1095 days. To assess the possibility that our effect was specific to a treatment-seeking sample, we also analyzed PCS scores from a separate military community sample of 768 OEF/OIF veterans evaluated pre-deployment and up to one-year post-deployment. Results In veterans evaluated at our clinic, we observed significantly lower PCS scores as time post-deployment increased (p = 0.018) after adjusting for probable post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We similarly observed in our community sample that PCS scores were lower both immediately after and one year after return from deployment (p < 0.001) relative to pre-deployment PCS. Further, PCS scores obtained 1-year post-deployment were significantly lower than scores obtained immediately post-deployment (p = 0.02). Conclusion In our clinical sample, the longer the duration between return from deployment and their visit to our clinic, the worse the Veteran’s physical health even after adjusting for PTSD. Additionally, a decline is also present in a military community sample of OEF/OIF veterans. These data suggest that, as time since deployment length increases, physical health may deteriorate for some veterans.
    BMC Public Health 12/2012; 12(1):1124. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-12-1124 · 2.26 Impact Factor
Show more