How well does routine hospitalisation data capture information on comorbidity in New Zealand?

AIMS

This study aims to assess the quality of routinely collected comorbidity data in New Zealand which are increasingly used in health service planning and research.

METHODS

Detailed medical notes-based comorbidity data from a cohort study of New Zealanders diagnosed with colon cancer in 1996-2003, were compared with routine hospital discharge data collected from the same patients using 1-year and 8-year lookback periods. We compared agreement between data sources for individual conditions, Charlson comorbidity index scores and total comorbidity counts using McNemar's p-test and the kappa statistic. We also assessed the association of comorbidity with all-cause survival using Cox proportional hazard models using data ascertained from the two sources.

RESULTS

Among these 569 patients, we found generally higher comorbidity was measured from notes than administrative data, with better comparability with an 8-year lookback period. Regardless of source of data, all measures of comorbidity significantly improved the ability of multivariable models to explain all-cause survival, but using both data sources combined resulted in better risk adjustment than either source separately.

CONCLUSION

While differences in medical notes and administrative comorbidity data exist, the latter provides a reasonably useful source of accessible information on comorbidity for risk adjustment particularly in multivariable models.