Risk Adjustment in Outcome Assessment: the Charlson Comorbidity Index

Abstract

To measure the burden of comorbid diseases using the MED-ECHO database (Quebec), the so-called Charlson index was adapted to International Classification of Disease (ICD-9) codes. The resulting comorbidity index was applied to the study of inpatient death in a group of 62,456 patients having one of the following conditions: ischemic heart disease, congestive heart failure, stroke, or bacterial pneumonia. Multiple logistic regression was used to relate inpatient death to its predictors, including gender, principal diagnosis, age, and the comorbidity index. Various transformations of the comorbidity score were performed, and their effect on predictive accuracy was assessed. The comorbidity index was constantly and strongly associated with death. When gender, age, comorbidity and the principal diagnoses were taken into account, the area under the receiver-operating curve was 0.83. Therefore, the Charlson Index is a useful approach to risk adjustment in outcomes research from administrative databases.

Key-Words

Comorbidity - Administrative Data - Risk Adjustment - Logistic Regression - Outcomes Research

• REFERENCES

• 1 Caper P. The epidemiologic surveillance of medical care. Am J Public Health 1987; 77: 669-70.
• 2 Cochran WG. Planning and Analysis of Observational Studies. . New York: Wiley; 1983
• 3 Rubin HR, Wu AW. The risk of adjustment. Med Care 1992; 30: 973-5.
• 4 Gonella JS, Goran MJ. Quality of patient care - A measurement of change: the staging concept. Med Care 1975; 13: 467-73.
• 5 Knaus WA, Zimmerman JE, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Lawrence DE. APACHE -acute physiology and chronic health evaluation: a physiologically based classification system. Crit Care Med 1981; 09: 591-7.
• 6 Horn SD. Measuring severity of illness: comparisons across institutions. Am J Public Health 1983; 73: 25-31.
• 7 Brewster AC, Karlin BG, Hyde LA. et al. MEDISGRPS: a clinically based approach to classifying hospital patients at admission. Inquiry 1985; 22: 377-87.
• 8 Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, McKen-zie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987; 40: 373-83.
• 9 Roos LL, Sharp SM, Cohen MM, Wajda A. Risk adjustment in claims-based research: the search for efficient approaches. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 1193-206.
• 10 Roos NP, Wennberg JE, Malenka DJ. et al. Mortality and reoperation after open and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 1120-4.
• 11 Gouvernement du Quebec. Ministere de la Sante et des Services sociaux. Direction generate du budget et de l’administration. Service de la gestion et de la diffusion de rinformation..
• 12 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. . New York: Wiley; 1989
• 13 DesHarnais S, McMahon Jr LF, Wroblew-ski R. Measuring outcomes of hospital care using multiple risk-adjusted indexes. Health Serv Res 1991; 425-45.
• 14 Fink A, Yano EM, Brook RH. The condition of the literature on differences in hospital mortality. Med Care 1989; 27: 315-36.
• 15 Kahn KL, Brook RH, Draper D. et al. Interpreting hospital mortality data: how can we proceed?. JAMA 1988; 260: 3625-8.
• 16 Siegel S, Castellan Jr NJ. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. . New York: McGraw Hill; 1988
• 17 Daley J, Jencks S, Draper D. et al. Predicting hospital-associated mortality for Medicare patients: a method for patients with stroke, pneumonia, acute myocardial infarction, and congestive heart failure. JAMA 1988; 260: 3617-24.
• 18 Jencks SF, Daley J, Draper D. et al. Interpreting hospital mortality data: the role of clinical risk adjustment. JAMA 1988; 260: 3611-6.
• 19 Green J, Wintfeld N, Sharkey P, Passman LI. The importance of severity of illness in assessing hospital mortality. JAMA 1990; 263: 241-6.
• 20 Erdreich LS, Lee ET. Use of relative operating characteristic analysis in epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 1981; 114: 649-62.
• 21 Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143: 29-36.
• 22 Greenfield S, Aronow HU, Elashoff RM, Watanabe D. Flaws in mortality data: the hazards of ignoring comorbid disease. JAMA 1988; 260: 253-5.
• 23 Jencks SF, Williams DK, Kay TL. Assessing hospital-associated deaths from discharge data: the role of length of stay and comorbidities. JAMA 1988; 260: 2240-6.
• 24 Krakauer H, Bailey RC, Skellan KJ. et al. Evaluation of the HCFA model for the analysis of mortality following hospitalization. Health Serv Res 1992; 27: 317-35.
• 25 Higgins TL, Estafanous FG, Loop FD. et al. Stratification of morbidity and mortality outcome by preoperative risk factors in coronary artery bypass patients - a clinical severity score. JAMA 1992; 267: 2344-8.
• 26 Hannan EL, Kilburn H, Lindsey ML, Lewis R. Clinical versus administrative data bases for CABG surgery: Does it matter?. Med Care 1992; 30: 892-907.
• 27 Iezzoni LI, Ash AS, Coffman GA, Mos-kowitz MA. Predicting in-hospital mortality: a comparison of serverity measurement approaches. Med Care 1992; 30: 347-59.
• 28 Smith DW, Pine M, Bailey RF. et al. Using clinical variables to estimate the risk of patient mortality. Med Care 1991; 29: 1108-29.