Why summary comorbidity measures such as the Charlson Comorbidity Index and Elixhauser score work

Medical Care

Volumn 53, Issue 9, 2015, Pages e65-e72

  Austin, Steven R ^a   Wong, Yu Ning ^b   Uzzo, Robert G ^c   Beck, J Robert ^d   Egleston, Brian L ^d  

^a Johns Hopkins University   (United States)

^b Department of Medical Oncology ^*  (United States)

^c FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^d TEMPLE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Charlson Comorbidity Index; Comorbidity adjustment; Comorbidity summary measures; Elixhauser score; Kidney cancer; Prognostic models; SEER Medicare

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER REGISTRY; CHARLSON COMORBIDITY INDEX; COMORBIDITY; CONFOUNDING VARIABLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELIXHAUSER COMORBIDITY INDEX; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SIMULATION; SURVIVAL RATE; ALGORITHM; CANCER STAGING; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; INCIDENCE; INSURANCE; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; COMORBIDITY; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INSURANCE CLAIM REVIEW; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; MALE; MEDICARE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROGNOSIS; RISK ADJUSTMENT; SEER PROGRAM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84942578393     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: 15371948     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318297429c     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Lieffers JR, Baracos VE, Winget M, et al. A comparison of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures to predict colorectal cancer survival using administrative health data. Cancer. 2011;117:1957-1965.
2. Lix LM, Quail J, Teare G, et al. Performance of comorbidity measures for predicting outcomes in population-based osteoporosis cohorts. Osteoporos Int. 2011;22:2633-2643.
3. Perkins AJ, Kroenke K, Unützer J, et al. Common comorbidity scales were similar in their ability to predict health care costs and mortality. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:1040-1048.
4. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:373-383.
5. Romano PS, Roos LL, Jollis JG. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data: differing perspectives. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46:1075-1079.
6. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:613-619.
7. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, et al. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36:8-27.
8. Van Walraven C, Austin PC, Jennings A, et al. A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data. Med Care. 2009;47:626-633.
9. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care. 2005;43:1130-1139.
10. De Groot V, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, et al. How to measure comorbidity. A critical review of available methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:221-229.
11. D'Hoore W, Bouckaert A, Tilquin C. Practical considerations on the use of the Charlson comorbidity index with administrative data bases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1429-1433.
12. Nuttall M, Van Der Meulen J, Emberton M. Charlson scores based on ICD-10 administrative data were valid in assessing comorbidity in patients undergoing urological cancer surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:265-273.
13. Katz JN, Chang LC, Sangha O, et al. Can comorbidity be measured by questionnaire rather than medical record review? Med Care. 1996;34:73-84.
14. Sangha O, Stucki G, Liang MH, et al. The Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire: a new method to assess comorbidity for clinical and health services research. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;49:156-163.
15. Klabunde CN, Potosky AL, Legler JM, et al. Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:1258-1267.
16. Sundararajan V, Quan H, Halfon P, et al. Cross-National comparative performance of three versions of the ICD-10 Charlson Index. Med Care. 2007;45:1210-1215.
17. Ghali WA, Hall RE, Rosen AK, et al. Searching for an improved clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative data. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:273-278.
18. Schneeweiss S, Maclure M. Use of comorbidity scores for control of confounding in studies using administrative databases. Int J Epidemiol. 2000;29:891-898.
19. Hansen BB. The prognostic analogue of the propensity score. Biometrika. 2008;95:481-488.
20. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for casual effects. Biometrika. 1983;70:41-55.
21. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc. 1984;79:516-524.
22. Sharabiani MTA, Aylin P, Bottle A. Systematic review of comorbidity indices for administrative data. Medical Care. 2012;50:1109-1118.
23. National Cancer Institute, US National Institutes of Health: About the SEER-Medicare Database. Available at: http://healthservices.cancer. gov/seermedicare/overview/. Accessed August 13, 2012.
24. Kutikov A, Egleston BL, Wong YN, et al. Evaluating overall survival and competing risks of death in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma using a comprehensive nomogram. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:311-317.
25. Elixhauser coding algorithm. Available at: http://www.hcup-us.ahrq. gov/tech-assist/faq.jsp. Accessed May 6, 2013.
26. Harrell FE Jr. Regression Modeling Strategies. New York, NY: Springer; 2001;493.
27. Foundation for Statistical Computing. R [Computer Program]. Version 2.13.1. Vienna, Austria: Foundation for Statistical Computing; 1998.