BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Measurement of multimorbidity and comorbidity is important in epidemiologic and health services research. The aim of this research was to derive a generic multimorbidity index based on patient self-report, incorporating severity, for predicting a range of outcomes. METHODS: The dataset was obtained from a trial including 1,541 Veterans and war widows aged 70 years and over. The survey included sociodemographics, hospital admissions, SF-36, and information on deaths was obtained. The methods of Charlson were used to derive Multimorbidity Indices. RESULTS: All indices predicted quality of life, with decreasing quality of life for each increase in multimorbidity category. Multimorbidity scores incorporating severity significantly contributed to the prediction of mortality, hospital admission, and follow-up quality of life, regardless of adjustment for baseline quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a single index cannot predict a variety of relevant outcomes. Consequently, research undertaken to assess the impact of intervention or illness on health outcomes should use an index that is valid for predicting the specific outcome of interest.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Measurement of multimorbidity and comorbidity is important in epidemiologic and health services research. The aim of this research was to derive a generic multimorbidity index based on patient self-report, incorporating severity, for predicting a range of outcomes. METHODS: The dataset was obtained from a trial including 1,541 Veterans and war widows aged 70 years and over. The survey included sociodemographics, hospital admissions, SF-36, and information on deaths was obtained. The methods of Charlson were used to derive Multimorbidity Indices. RESULTS: All indices predicted quality of life, with decreasing quality of life for each increase in multimorbidity category. Multimorbidity scores incorporating severity significantly contributed to the prediction of mortality, hospital admission, and follow-up quality of life, regardless of adjustment for baseline quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a single index cannot predict a variety of relevant outcomes. Consequently, research undertaken to assess the impact of intervention or illness on health outcomes should use an index that is valid for predicting the specific outcome of interest.
Authors: Irene G M Wijers; Alba Ayala; Carmen Rodriguez-Blazquez; Angel Rodriguez-Laso; Pilar Rodriguez-García; Alexandra Prados-Torres; Vicente Rodriguez-Rodriguez; Maria João Forjaz Journal: Eur J Ageing Date: 2018-11-01
Authors: Huang-Tz Ou; Bhramar Mukherjee; Steven R Erickson; John D Piette; Richard P Bagozzi; Rajesh Balkrishnan Journal: Popul Health Manag Date: 2012-06-25 Impact factor: 2.459
Authors: Elizabeth A Bayliss; Jennifer L Ellis; Jo Ann Shoup; Chan Zeng; Deanna B McQuillan; John F Steiner Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2012 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Justine S Sefcik; Darina Petrovsky; Megan Streur; Mark Toles; Melissa O'Connor; Connie M Ulrich; Sherry Marcantonio; Ken Coburn; Mary D Naylor; Helene Moriarty Journal: Clin Nurs Res Date: 2016-12-30 Impact factor: 2.075
Authors: Lillian Min; Neil Wenger; Anne M Walling; Caroline Blaum; Christine Cigolle; David A Ganz; David Reuben; Paul Shekelle; Carol Roth; Eve A Kerr Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Tanisha Jowsey; Yun-Hee Jeon; Paul Dugdale; Nicholas J Glasgow; Marjan Kljakovic; Tim Usherwood Journal: Aust New Zealand Health Policy Date: 2009-09-08