Dataset Information

The ability of comorbidity indices to predict mortality in an orthopedic setting: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several comorbidity indices have been created to estimate and adjust for the burden of comorbidity. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the ability of different comorbidity indices to predict mortality in an orthopedic setting.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library. The search were constructed around two primary focal points: a comorbidity index and orthopedics. The last search were performed on 13 June 2019. Eligibility criteria were participants with orthopedic conditions or who underwent an orthopedic procedure, a comparison between comorbidity indices that used administrative data, and reported mortality as outcome. Two independent reviewers screened the studies using Covidence. The area under the curve (AUC) was chosen as the primary effect estimate.

Results

Of the 5338 studies identified, 16 met the eligibility criteria. The predictive ability of the different comorbidity indices ranged from poor (AUC < 0.70) to excellent (AUC ≥ 0.90). The majority of the included studies compared the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). In-hospital mortality was reported in eight studies reporting AUC values ranging from 0.70 to 0.92 for ECI and 0.68 to 0.89 for CCI. AUC values were generally lower for all other time points ranging from 0.67 to 0.78. For 1-year mortality the overall effect size ranging from 0.67 to 0.77 for ECI and 0.69 to 0.77 for CCI.

Conclusion

The results of this review indicate that the ECI and CCI can equally be used to adjust for comorbidities when analyzing mortality in an orthopedic setting.

Trial registration

The protocol for this systematic review was registered on PROSPERO, the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 13 June 2019 and can be accessed through record ID 133,871.

SUBMITTER: Gundtoft PH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8375166 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeveral different indices summarize patient comorbidity using health care data. An accurate index can be used to describe the risk profile of patients, and as an adjustment factor in analyses. How well these indices perform in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is not well known.ObjectiveAssess the performance of 5 comorbidity indices at predicting mortality in 3 different patient groups with CKD: incident kidney transplant recipients, maintenance dialysis patients, and individuals with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).DesignPopulation-based retrospective cohort study.SettingOntario, Canada, between 2004 and 2014.PatientsIndividuals at the time they first received a kidney transplant, received maintenance dialysis, or were confirmed to have an eGFR less than 45 mL/min per 1.73m2.MeasurementsFive comorbidity indices: Charlson comorbidity index, end-stage renal disease-modified Charlson comorbidity index, Johns Hopkins' Aggregated Diagnosis Groups score, Elixhauser score, and Wright-Khan index. Our primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality.MethodsComorbidity indices were estimated using information in the prior 2 years. Each group was randomly divided 100 times into derivation and validation samples. Model discrimination was assessed using median c-statistics from logistic regression models, and calibration was evaluated graphically.ResultsWe identified 4111 kidney transplant recipients, 23 897 individuals receiving maintenance dialysis, and 181 425 individuals with a low eGFR. Within 1 year, 108 (2.6%), 4179 (17.5%), and 17 898 (9.9%) in each group had died, respectively. In the validation sample, model discrimination was inadequate with median c-statistics less than 0.7 for all 5 comorbidity indices for all 3 groups. Calibration was also poor for all models.LimitationsThe study used administrative health care data so there is the potential for misclassification. Indices were modeled as continuous scores as opposed to indicators for individual conditions to limit overfitting.ConclusionsExisting comorbidity indices do not accurately predict 1-year mortality in patients with CKD. Current indices could be modified with additional risk factors to improve their performance in CKD, or a new index could be developed for this population.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding how comorbidity measures contribute to patient mortality is essential both to describe patient health status and to adjust for risks and potential confounding. The Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices are well-established for risk adjustment and mortality prediction. Still, a different set of comorbidity weights might improve the prediction of in-hospital mortality. The present study, therefore, aimed to derive a set of new Swiss Elixhauser comorbidity weightings, to validate and compare them against those of the Charlson and Elixhauser-based van Walraven weights in an adult in-patient population-based cohort of general hospitals.MethodsRetrospective analysis was conducted with routine data of 102 Swiss general hospitals (2012-2017) for 6.09 million inpatient cases. To derive the Swiss weightings for the Elixhauser comorbidity index, we randomly halved the inpatient data and validated the results of part 1 alongside the established weighting systems in part 2, to predict in-hospital mortality. Charlson and van Walraven weights were applied to Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices. Derivation and validation of weightings were conducted with generalized additive models adjusted for age, gender and hospital types.ResultsOverall, the Elixhauser indices, c-statistic with Swiss weights (0.867, 95% CI, 0.865-0.868) and van Walraven's weights (0.863, 95% CI, 0.862-0.864) had substantial advantage over Charlson's weights (0.850, 95% CI, 0.849-0.851) and in the derivation and validation groups. The net reclassification improvement of new Swiss weights improved the predictive performance by 1.6% on the Elixhauser-van Walraven and 4.9% on the Charlson weights.ConclusionsAll weightings confirmed previous results with the national dataset. The new Swiss weightings model improved slightly the prediction of in-hospital mortality in Swiss hospitals. The newly derive weights support patient population-based analysis of in-hospital mortality and seek country or specific cohort-based weightings.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Predicting risk of premature death is one of the most basic tasks in medicine and public health, but has proven to be difficult over the long term even with the best prognostic models. One popular strategy has been to improve prognostic models with candidate genes and other novel biomarkers. However, the gains in predictive power have been modest and the costs have been high, leading to a demand for cost-effective alternatives. We conducted a proof-of-principle investigation to examine whether simple, cheap, and noninvasive paper-and-pencil measures of social class and personality phenotype could improve the performance of one of the most widely used prediction models for all-cause mortality, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). METHODS:We used data from baseline and 25-year mortality follow-up of the UK Health and Lifestyle Study cohort. In a subset of the cohort, we first identified 5 psychosocial factors highly predictive of mortality: income, education, type A personality, communalism (preference for the company of others), and "lie" scale (a measure of denial, putatively associated with ill health). We then examined the predictive performance of the CCI with and without these measures in a validation subsample. RESULTS:Across 5-, 10-, 15-, 20-, and 25-year time horizons, the psychosocially augmented CCI showed substantially better discrimination [area under the receiver-operating curves (95% confidence interval) from 0.83 (0.81-0.85) to 0.84 (0.83-0.86)] than the CCI [area under the receiver-operating curves from 0.74 (0.71-0.76) to 0.77 (0.76-0.79)]. These translated into net reclassification improvements from 27% (23%-31%) to 35% (32%-38%) of survivors and from 23% (17%-30%) to 34% (17%-30%) of decedents; and 23%-42% reductions in the Number Needed to Screen. Calibration improved at all time horizons except 25 years, where it was decreased. CONCLUSION:Widespread attempts to improve prognostic models might consider not only novel biomarkers, but also psychosocial questionnaire measures.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Comorbidity in traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been recognised to alter the clinical course of patients and influence short-term and long-term outcomes. We synthesised the evidence on the effects of different comorbid conditions on early and late mortality post-TBI in order to (1) examine the relationship between comorbid condition(s) and all-cause mortality in TBI and (2) determine the influence of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with a TBI at baseline on all-cause mortality. DESIGN:Systematic review. DATA SOURCES:Medline, Central, Embase, PsycINFO and bibliographies of identified articles were searched from May 1997 to January 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:Included studies met the following criteria: (1) focused on comorbidity as it related to our outcome of interest in adults (ie, ≥18 years of age) diagnosed with a TBI; (2) comorbidity was detected by any means excluding self-report; (3) reported the proportion of participants without comorbidity and (4) followed participants for any period of time. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Data were synthesised through tabulation and qualitative description. RESULTS:A total of 27 cohort studies were included. Among the wide range of individual comorbid conditions studied, only low blood pressure was a consistent predictors of post-TBI mortality. Other consistent predictors were traditional sociodemographic risk factors. Higher comorbidity scale, scores and the number of comorbid conditions were not consistently associated with post-TBI mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Given the high number of comorbid conditions that were examined by the single studies, research is required to further substantiate the evidence and address conflicting findings. Finally, an enhanced set of comorbidity measures that are suited for the TBI population will allow for better risk stratification to guide TBI management and treatment. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017070033.

Project description:ObjectiveThe health belief model specifies that individuals' perceptions about particular behavior can predict the performance of respective behavior. So far, the model has been used to explain why people did not follow COVID-19 preventive behavior. Although we are using it, to our best knowledge, its predictive ability in COVID-19 preventive behavior is unexplored. So, this review aimed to assess the model's predictive ability and identify the most frequently related construct.MethodA systematic review was conducted to examine the predictive ability of health belief model in COVID-19 preventive behavior using research done all over the world. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis guidelines were used. Comprehensive literature was searched using databases such as PubMed, Google scholar, and African Online Journal to retrieve related articles. Descriptive analyses such as the proportion of studies that better explained COVID-19 prevention behavior and the significance ratio of each construct of the model were made.ResultOverall, 1552 articles were retrieved using a search strategy and finally 32 articles fulfilling the inclusion criteria undergo the review. We found that in the majority (87.5%) of the studies health belief model has a good predictive ability of COVID-19-related behavior. Overall the explained variance for health belief model ranged from 6.5% to 90.1%. The perceived benefit was the most frequently significant predictor; highest significance ratio (96.7%) followed by self-efficacy, cues to action perceived barrier, susceptibility, and severity in decreasing order.ConclusionHealth belief model has a good predictive ability of COVID-19-related behavior in the majority of reviewed studies. The perceived benefit was the most frequently significant predictor of COVID-19-related behavior. Professionals who are in need can effectively use health belief model in planning and designing interventions to prevent and control the pandemic.