Cargando…

Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases

BACKGROUND: The performance of the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures in predicting patient outcomes have been well validated with ICD-9 data but not with ICD-10 data, especially in disease specific patient cohorts. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of these two com...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Bing, Evans, Dewey, Faris, Peter, Dean, Stafford, Quan, Hude
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2267188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194561
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-12
_version_ 1782151620332617728
author Li, Bing
Evans, Dewey
Faris, Peter
Dean, Stafford
Quan, Hude
author_facet Li, Bing
Evans, Dewey
Faris, Peter
Dean, Stafford
Quan, Hude
author_sort Li, Bing
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The performance of the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures in predicting patient outcomes have been well validated with ICD-9 data but not with ICD-10 data, especially in disease specific patient cohorts. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of these two comorbidity measures in the prediction of in-hospital and 1 year mortality among patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), diabetes, chronic renal failure (CRF), stroke and patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: A Canadian provincial hospital discharge administrative database was used to define 17 Charlson comorbidities and 30 Elixhauser comorbidities. C-statistic values were calculated to evaluate the performance of two measures. One year mortality information was obtained from the provincial Vital Statistics Department. RESULTS: The absolute difference between ICD-9 and ICD-10 data in C-statistics ranged from 0 to 0.04 across five cohorts for the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures predicting in-hospital or 1 year mortality. In the models predicting in-hospital mortality using ICD-10 data, the C-statistics ranged from 0.62 (for stroke) – 0.82 (for diabetes) for Charlson measure and 0.62 (for stroke) to 0.83 (for CABG) for Elixhauser measure. CONCLUSION: The change in coding algorithms did not influence the performance of either the Charlson or Elixhauser comorbidity measures in the prediction of outcome. Both comorbidity measures were still valid prognostic indicators in the ICD-10 data and had a similar performance in predicting short and long term mortality in the ICD-9 and ICD-10 data.
format Text
id pubmed-2267188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-22671882008-03-13 Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases Li, Bing Evans, Dewey Faris, Peter Dean, Stafford Quan, Hude BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The performance of the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures in predicting patient outcomes have been well validated with ICD-9 data but not with ICD-10 data, especially in disease specific patient cohorts. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of these two comorbidity measures in the prediction of in-hospital and 1 year mortality among patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), diabetes, chronic renal failure (CRF), stroke and patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: A Canadian provincial hospital discharge administrative database was used to define 17 Charlson comorbidities and 30 Elixhauser comorbidities. C-statistic values were calculated to evaluate the performance of two measures. One year mortality information was obtained from the provincial Vital Statistics Department. RESULTS: The absolute difference between ICD-9 and ICD-10 data in C-statistics ranged from 0 to 0.04 across five cohorts for the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures predicting in-hospital or 1 year mortality. In the models predicting in-hospital mortality using ICD-10 data, the C-statistics ranged from 0.62 (for stroke) – 0.82 (for diabetes) for Charlson measure and 0.62 (for stroke) to 0.83 (for CABG) for Elixhauser measure. CONCLUSION: The change in coding algorithms did not influence the performance of either the Charlson or Elixhauser comorbidity measures in the prediction of outcome. Both comorbidity measures were still valid prognostic indicators in the ICD-10 data and had a similar performance in predicting short and long term mortality in the ICD-9 and ICD-10 data. BioMed Central 2008-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC2267188/ /pubmed/18194561 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-12 Text en Copyright © 2008 Li et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Li, Bing
Evans, Dewey
Faris, Peter
Dean, Stafford
Quan, Hude
Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases
title Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases
title_full Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases
title_fullStr Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases
title_full_unstemmed Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases
title_short Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases
title_sort risk adjustment performance of charlson and elixhauser comorbidities in icd-9 and icd-10 administrative databases
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2267188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194561
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-12
work_keys_str_mv AT libing riskadjustmentperformanceofcharlsonandelixhausercomorbiditiesinicd9andicd10administrativedatabases
AT evansdewey riskadjustmentperformanceofcharlsonandelixhausercomorbiditiesinicd9andicd10administrativedatabases
AT farispeter riskadjustmentperformanceofcharlsonandelixhausercomorbiditiesinicd9andicd10administrativedatabases
AT deanstafford riskadjustmentperformanceofcharlsonandelixhausercomorbiditiesinicd9andicd10administrativedatabases
AT quanhude riskadjustmentperformanceofcharlsonandelixhausercomorbiditiesinicd9andicd10administrativedatabases