Validez de los grupos de morbilidad ajustados respecto a los clinical risk groups en el ámbito de la atención primaria

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance in terms of goodness of fit and explanatory power of 2 morbidity groupers in primary care (PC): adjusted morbidity groups (AMG) and clinical risk groups (CRG). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. LOCATION: PC in the Catalan Institute for the Health (CIH), Catalonia, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Population allocated in primary care centers of the CIH for the year 2014. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Three indicators of interest are analyzed such as urgent hospitalization, number of visits and spending in pharmacy. A stratified analysis by centers is applied adjusting generalized lineal models from the variables age, sex and morbidity grouping to explain each one of the 3 variables of interest. The statistical measures to analyze the performance of the different models applied are the Akaike index, the Bayes index and the pseudo-variability explained by deviance change. RESULTS: The results show that in the area of the primary care the explanatory power of the AMGs is higher to that offered by the CRGs, especially for the case of the visits and the pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of GMAs in the area of the CIH PC is higher than that shown by the CRGs.