de Groot Vincent, Beckerman Heleen, Lankhorst Gustaaf J, Bouter Lex M
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2003 Mar;56(3):221-9. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(02)00585-1.
The object of this article was to systematically review available methods to measure comorbidity and to assess their validity and reliability. A search was made in Medline and Embase, with the keywords comorbidity and multi-morbidity, to identify articles in which a method to measure comorbidity was described. The references of these articles were also checked, and using a standardized checklist the relevant data were extracted from these articles. An assessment was made of the content, concurrent, predictive and construct validity, and the reliability. Thirteen different methods to measure comorbidity were identified: one disease count and 12 indexes. Data on content and predictive validity were available for all measures, while data on construct validity were available for nine methods, data on concurrent validity, and interrater reliability for eight methods, and data on intrarater reliability for three methods. The Charlson Index is the most extensively studied comorbidity index for predicting mortality. The Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) addresses all relevant body systems without using specific diagnoses. The Index of Coexisting Disease (ICED) has a two-dimensional structure, measuring disease severity and disability, which can be useful when mortality and disability are the outcomes of interest. The Kaplan Index was specifically developed for use in diabetes research. The Charlson Index, the CIRS, the ICED and the Kaplan Index are valid and reliable methods to measure comorbidity that can be used in clinical research. For the other indexes, insufficient data on the clinimetric properties are available.
本文的目的是系统回顾测量共病的现有方法,并评估其有效性和可靠性。在Medline和Embase数据库中进行检索,使用关键词“共病”和“多重共病”,以识别描述了共病测量方法的文章。还检查了这些文章的参考文献,并使用标准化清单从这些文章中提取相关数据。对内容效度、同时效度、预测效度和结构效度以及可靠性进行了评估。共识别出13种不同的共病测量方法:一种疾病计数法和12种指数。所有测量方法都有关于内容效度和预测效度的数据,9种方法有关于结构效度的数据,8种方法有关于同时效度和评分者间信度的数据,3种方法有关于评分者内信度的数据。查尔森指数是用于预测死亡率研究最广泛的共病指数。累积疾病评定量表(CIRS)涉及所有相关身体系统,无需使用特定诊断。共存疾病指数(ICED)具有二维结构,可测量疾病严重程度和残疾程度,当死亡率和残疾是感兴趣的结果时可能会有用。卡普兰指数是专门为糖尿病研究而开发的。查尔森指数、CIRS、ICED和卡普兰指数是可用于临床研究的有效且可靠的共病测量方法。对于其他指数,关于临床测量特性的数据不足。