Kyung Min Ho, Yoon Seok-Jun, Ahn Hyeong-Sik, Hwang Se-min, Seo Hyun-Ju, Kim Kyoung-Hoon, Park Hyeung-Keun
Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University, Korea.
J Prev Med Public Health. 2009 Mar;42(2):117-22. doi: 10.3961/jpmph.2009.42.2.117.
We tried to evaluate the agreement of the Charlson comorbidity index values (CCI) obtained from different sources (medical records and National Health Insurance claims data) for gastric cancer patients. We also attempted to assess the prognostic value of these data for predicting 1-year mortality and length of the hospital stay (length of stay).
Medical records of 284 gastric cancer patients were reviewed, and their National Health Insurance claims data and death certificates were also investigated. To evaluate agreement, the kappa coefficient was tested. Multiple logistic regression analysis and multiple linear regression analysis were performed to evaluate and compare the prognostic power for predicting 1 year mortality and length of stay.
The CCI values for each comorbid condition obtained from 2 different data sources appeared to poorly agree (kappa: 0.00-0.59). It was appeared that the CCI values based on both sources were not valid prognostic indicators of 1-year mortality. Only medical record-based CCI was a valid prognostic indicator of length of stay, even after adjustment of covariables (beta=0.112, 95% CI=[0.017-1.267]).
There was a discrepancy between the data sources with regard to the value of CCI both for the prognostic power and its direction. Therefore, assuming that medical records are the gold standard for the source for CCI measurement, claims data is not an appropriate source for determining the CCI, at least for gastric cancer.
我们试图评估从不同来源(病历和国民健康保险理赔数据)获得的胃癌患者查尔森合并症指数(CCI)值的一致性。我们还试图评估这些数据对预测1年死亡率和住院时间(住院时长)的预后价值。
回顾了284例胃癌患者的病历,并调查了他们的国民健康保险理赔数据和死亡证明。为评估一致性,对kappa系数进行了检验。进行多因素逻辑回归分析和多因素线性回归分析,以评估和比较预测1年死亡率和住院时长的预后能力。
从2个不同数据源获得的每种合并症的CCI值似乎一致性较差(kappa值:0.00 - 0.59)。基于两种来源的CCI值似乎都不是1年死亡率的有效预后指标。即使在调整协变量后,仅基于病历的CCI是住院时长的有效预后指标(β = 0.112,95%可信区间 = [0.017 - 1.267])。
在预后能力及其方向方面,CCI值在数据源之间存在差异。因此,假设病历是测量CCI的金标准来源,理赔数据不是确定CCI的合适来源,至少对于胃癌患者是这样。