比较主要合并症指标作为预测全因死亡率在退伍军人事务医疗保健系统。

IF 7.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Hind A. Beydoun , Dorota Szymkowiak , May A. Beydoun , Neil Nixdorff , Robert Brunner , Jack Tsai
{"title":"比较主要合并症指标作为预测全因死亡率在退伍军人事务医疗保健系统。","authors":"Hind A. Beydoun ,&nbsp;Dorota Szymkowiak ,&nbsp;May A. Beydoun ,&nbsp;Neil Nixdorff ,&nbsp;Robert Brunner ,&nbsp;Jack Tsai","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI), and the Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI) are validated clinical measures of comorbidity, but direct comparisons between these measures have rarely been studied especially in high-risk patient populations, such as homeless individuals. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers large patient samples to compare these comorbidity measures as predictors of mortality using administrative and clinical records. We examined CCI, ECI, and FCI scores among veterans seeking VA healthcare services, including those experiencing homelessness, and compared their predictive value in relation to all-cause mortality risk.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design and Setting</h3><div>Several VA databases from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively linked, and 4,701,711 U S. veterans [308,553 with homelessness and 4,393,158 without homelessness] were evaluated over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, yielding 917,921 recorded deaths. Regression models were constructed, and Harrell's Concordance Statistic (HCS) was calculated that assessed the ability of z-transformed comorbidity scores to discriminate “high-risk” vs “low-risk” groups of patients for mortality risk, after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In adjusted models, ECI (HCS: 0.76–0.77) and CCI (HCS: 0.75–0.76) were better able to discriminate “high-risk” vs “low-risk” groups than FCI (HCS: 0.72–0.75) among homeless and nonhomeless veterans. Compared to ECI and CCI, FCI was more strongly associated with homelessness.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>CCI and ECI may be more predictive of all-cause mortality risk than FCI, although FCI may be a useful measure of functioning in homeless populations.</div></div><div><h3>Plain Language Summary</h3><div>The CCI, ECI, and FCI are clinical measures of comorbidity, but their direct comparisons have been limited, especially in high-risk patient populations like homeless individuals. This study examined CCI, ECI, and FCI scores among veterans seeking health care services at the US Department of Veterans Affairs and found that ECI and CCI were better at discriminating high-risk vs low-risk groups and predicting mortality among homeless and nonhomeless veterans.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"182 ","pages":"Article 111778"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing major comorbidity indices as predictors of all-cause mortality in the Veterans Affairs health care system\",\"authors\":\"Hind A. Beydoun ,&nbsp;Dorota Szymkowiak ,&nbsp;May A. Beydoun ,&nbsp;Neil Nixdorff ,&nbsp;Robert Brunner ,&nbsp;Jack Tsai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111778\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI), and the Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI) are validated clinical measures of comorbidity, but direct comparisons between these measures have rarely been studied especially in high-risk patient populations, such as homeless individuals. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers large patient samples to compare these comorbidity measures as predictors of mortality using administrative and clinical records. We examined CCI, ECI, and FCI scores among veterans seeking VA healthcare services, including those experiencing homelessness, and compared their predictive value in relation to all-cause mortality risk.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design and Setting</h3><div>Several VA databases from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively linked, and 4,701,711 U S. veterans [308,553 with homelessness and 4,393,158 without homelessness] were evaluated over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, yielding 917,921 recorded deaths. Regression models were constructed, and Harrell's Concordance Statistic (HCS) was calculated that assessed the ability of z-transformed comorbidity scores to discriminate “high-risk” vs “low-risk” groups of patients for mortality risk, after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In adjusted models, ECI (HCS: 0.76–0.77) and CCI (HCS: 0.75–0.76) were better able to discriminate “high-risk” vs “low-risk” groups than FCI (HCS: 0.72–0.75) among homeless and nonhomeless veterans. Compared to ECI and CCI, FCI was more strongly associated with homelessness.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>CCI and ECI may be more predictive of all-cause mortality risk than FCI, although FCI may be a useful measure of functioning in homeless populations.</div></div><div><h3>Plain Language Summary</h3><div>The CCI, ECI, and FCI are clinical measures of comorbidity, but their direct comparisons have been limited, especially in high-risk patient populations like homeless individuals. This study examined CCI, ECI, and FCI scores among veterans seeking health care services at the US Department of Veterans Affairs and found that ECI and CCI were better at discriminating high-risk vs low-risk groups and predicting mortality among homeless and nonhomeless veterans.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"182 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111778\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435625001118\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435625001118","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:Charlson合并症指数(CCI)、Elixhauser合并症指数(ECI)和功能性合并症指数(FCI)是有效的合并症临床指标,但很少研究这些指标之间的直接比较,特别是在高危患者人群中,如无家可归者。美国退伍军人事务部(VA)提供了大量的患者样本来比较这些共病措施,并使用行政和临床记录作为死亡率的预测指标。我们检查了寻求VA医疗服务的退伍军人(包括无家可归的退伍军人)的CCI、ECI和FCI评分,并比较了它们与全因死亡率风险的预测价值。研究设计和背景:对2017-2021年的几个退伍军人管理局数据库进行了回顾性链接,对4701,711名美国退伍军人(308,553名无家可归者和4,393,158名没有无家可归者)进行了中位随访4.1年的评估,记录了917,921例死亡。构建回归模型,计算Harrell’s Concordance Statistic (HCS),评估z-转化共病评分区分“高风险”与“高危”的能力。“低风险”组患者的死亡率风险,调整后的人口统计学和临床特征。结果:在调整后的模型中,ECI (HCS: 0.76-0.77)和CCI (HCS: 0.75-0.76)能够更好地区分“高风险”vs。在无家可归和非无家可归的退伍军人中,“低风险”组高于FCI (HCS: 0.72-0.75)。与ECI和CCI相比,FCI与无家可归的关系更为密切。结论:CCI和ECI可能比FCI更能预测全因死亡风险,尽管FCI可能是衡量无家可归人群功能的有用指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing major comorbidity indices as predictors of all-cause mortality in the Veterans Affairs health care system

Objectives

The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI), and the Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI) are validated clinical measures of comorbidity, but direct comparisons between these measures have rarely been studied especially in high-risk patient populations, such as homeless individuals. The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers large patient samples to compare these comorbidity measures as predictors of mortality using administrative and clinical records. We examined CCI, ECI, and FCI scores among veterans seeking VA healthcare services, including those experiencing homelessness, and compared their predictive value in relation to all-cause mortality risk.

Study Design and Setting

Several VA databases from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively linked, and 4,701,711 U S. veterans [308,553 with homelessness and 4,393,158 without homelessness] were evaluated over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, yielding 917,921 recorded deaths. Regression models were constructed, and Harrell's Concordance Statistic (HCS) was calculated that assessed the ability of z-transformed comorbidity scores to discriminate “high-risk” vs “low-risk” groups of patients for mortality risk, after adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics.

Results

In adjusted models, ECI (HCS: 0.76–0.77) and CCI (HCS: 0.75–0.76) were better able to discriminate “high-risk” vs “low-risk” groups than FCI (HCS: 0.72–0.75) among homeless and nonhomeless veterans. Compared to ECI and CCI, FCI was more strongly associated with homelessness.

Conclusion

CCI and ECI may be more predictive of all-cause mortality risk than FCI, although FCI may be a useful measure of functioning in homeless populations.

Plain Language Summary

The CCI, ECI, and FCI are clinical measures of comorbidity, but their direct comparisons have been limited, especially in high-risk patient populations like homeless individuals. This study examined CCI, ECI, and FCI scores among veterans seeking health care services at the US Department of Veterans Affairs and found that ECI and CCI were better at discriminating high-risk vs low-risk groups and predicting mortality among homeless and nonhomeless veterans.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
6.90%
发文量
320
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology strives to enhance the quality of clinical and patient-oriented healthcare research by advancing and applying innovative methods in conducting, presenting, synthesizing, disseminating, and translating research results into optimal clinical practice. Special emphasis is placed on training new generations of scientists and clinical practice leaders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信