Martin Nuttall1, Jan van der Meulen, Mark Emberton. 1. Clinical Effectiveness Unit, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 35-43 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adjustment for comorbidity is an essential component of any observational study comparing outcomes. We evaluated the validity of the Charlson comorbidity score based on ICD-10 codes in patients undergoing urological cancer surgery within an English administrative database. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Patients who underwent radical urological cancer surgery between 1998 and 2002 in the English National Health Service were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database (N = 20,138). ICD-9-CM codes defining comorbid diseases according to the Deyo and Dartmouth-Manitoba adaptations of the Charlson comorbidity score were translated into ICD-10 codes. RESULTS: Charlson scores derived by the ICD-10 translation of the Deyo and Dartmouth-Manitoba adaptations were identical in 16,623 patients (83%; kappa = .63). For both adaptations, ICD-10 scores increased with age, were higher in patients admitted on an emergency basis, and predicted short-term outcome. Addition of either the ICD-10 Charlson Deyo or Dartmouth-Manitoba score to risk models containing age and sex to predict in-hospital mortality resulted in a better model fit but only in small improvements of the predictive power. CONCLUSION: The ICD-10 translations of the Deyo and Dartmouth-Manitoba adaptations performed similarly in risk models predicting hospital mortality following urological cancer surgery. Adjustment for comorbidity over and above age and sex alone does not seem to provide a large improvement.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adjustment for comorbidity is an essential component of any observational study comparing outcomes. We evaluated the validity of the Charlson comorbidity score based on ICD-10 codes in patients undergoing urological cancer surgery within an English administrative database. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:Patients who underwent radical urological cancer surgery between 1998 and 2002 in the English National Health Service were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database (N = 20,138). ICD-9-CM codes defining comorbid diseases according to the Deyo and Dartmouth-Manitoba adaptations of the Charlson comorbidity score were translated into ICD-10 codes. RESULTS: Charlson scores derived by the ICD-10 translation of the Deyo and Dartmouth-Manitoba adaptations were identical in 16,623 patients (83%; kappa = .63). For both adaptations, ICD-10 scores increased with age, were higher in patients admitted on an emergency basis, and predicted short-term outcome. Addition of either the ICD-10 Charlson Deyo or Dartmouth-Manitoba score to risk models containing age and sex to predict in-hospital mortality resulted in a better model fit but only in small improvements of the predictive power. CONCLUSION: The ICD-10 translations of the Deyo and Dartmouth-Manitoba adaptations performed similarly in risk models predicting hospital mortality following urological cancer surgery. Adjustment for comorbidity over and above age and sex alone does not seem to provide a large improvement.
Authors: M Jane Mohler; Stephen Joel Coons; Mark C Hornbrook; Lisa J Herrinton; Christopher S Wendel; Marcia Grant; Robert S Krouse Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2008-06-09 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Daniel Z Uslan; Imad M Tleyjeh; Larry M Baddour; Paul A Friedman; Sarah M Jenkins; Jennifer L St Sauver; David L Hayes Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Philip R Harvey; James Rees; Simon Baldwin; Hina Waheed; Jamie-Rae Tanner; Felicity Evison; Prashant Patel; Nigel J Trudgill Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Philip P Goodney; Dale Tavris; F Lee Lucas; Thomas Gross; Elliott S Fisher; Samuel R G Finlayson Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2010-04-10 Impact factor: 4.268