Literature DB >> 21490514

Developing a claim-based version of the ACE-27 comorbidity index: a comparison with medical record review.

Steven T Fleming1, Susan A Sabatino, Gretchen Kimmick, Rosemary Cress, Xiao-Cheng Wu, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Bin Huang, Wenke Hwang, Jonathan Liff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The adult comorbidity evaluation (ACE-27) is a medical record-based comorbidity index that predicts survival among various types of cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the medical record-based ACE-27 instrument to a newly developed administrative claim-based ACE-27 measure. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: Cross-sectional study of 4,300 breast and prostate cancer patients from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Patterns of Care Study.
RESULTS: Comorbidities with the highest concordance were diabetes (sensitivity=84.6%, κ=0.58 for breast cancer patients; sensitivity=0.764, κ=0.54 for prostate cancer patients), and hypertension (sensitivity=78.5%, κ=0.32 for breast cancer patients; sensitivity=69.6%, κ=0.28 for prostate cancer patients). Diseases with fair or moderate agreement in one or both cancer sites include congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, hypertension, respiratory diseases, hepatic disease, renal disease, dementia, and neuromuscular disease. For overall indices, agreement was fair but with high sensitivities in the collapsed indices, and the highest sensitivities in the lowest level of decompensation.
CONCLUSIONS: The ACE-27 comorbidity score derived from administrative claims data provides a tool to examine the relationship between comorbidity, cancer diagnosis, and outcomes in future epidemiologic research, particularly when medical record review is logistically impossible. The classification of most comorbidities into 2 or 3 levels of severity within a claim-based measure is a major development. Future research should be directed toward refining the measure with a longer review period or different paradigms for diagnosis identification, and testing the predictive ability of the measure in terms of survival, complications, or other outcomes of care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21490514     DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318215d7dd

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  13 in total

1.  Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Treatment Delay Within Appalachia--The Role of For-Profit Hospitals.

Authors:  Eric E Seiber; Fabian Camacho; Muhammad Fazal Zeeshan; Teresa T Kern; Steven T Fleming
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2015-05-29       Impact factor: 4.333

2.  The Relative Ability of Comorbidity Ascertainment Methodologies to Predict In-Hospital Mortality Among Hospitalized Community-acquired Pneumonia Patients.

Authors:  Ronald E Weir; Christopher S Lyttle; David O Meltzer; Tien S Dong; Gregory W Ruhnke
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Diabetes management before and after cancer diagnosis: missed opportunity.

Authors:  Nengliang Yao; Fabian T Camacho; Askar S Chukmaitov; Steven T Fleming; Roger T Anderson
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-04

Review 4.  Patient-reported outcomes in the Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium.

Authors:  Deborah J Bowen; Eileen H Shinn; Sophie Gregrowski; Gretchen Kimmick; Laura S Dominici; Elizabeth S Frank; Karen Lisa Smith; Gabrielle Rocque; Kathryn J Ruddy; Teri Pollastro; Michelle Melisko; Tarah J Ballinger; Oluwadamilola M Fayanju; Antonio C Wolff
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Clinical, sociodemographic, and service provider determinants of guideline concordant colorectal cancer care for Appalachian residents.

Authors:  Steven T Fleming; Heath B Mackley; Fabian Camacho; Eric E Seiber; Niraj J Gusani; Stephen A Matthews; Jason Liao; Tse-Chuan Yang; Wenke Hwang; Nengliang Yao
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 4.333

Review 6.  State-level cancer quality assessment and research: building and sustaining the data infrastructure.

Authors:  Joseph Lipscomb; Theresa W Gillespie
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.360

7.  Enhancing cancer registry data for comparative effectiveness research (CER) project: overview and methodology.

Authors:  Vivien W Chen; Christie R Eheman; Christopher J Johnson; Monique N Hernandez; David Rousseau; Timothy S Styles; Dee W West; Meichin Hsieh; Anne M Hakenewerth; Maria O Celaya; Randi K Rycroft; Jennifer M Wike; Melissa Pearson; Judy Brockhouse; Linda G Mulvihill; Kevin B Zhang
Journal:  J Registry Manag       Date:  2014

8.  Comparison of comorbidity collection methods.

Authors:  Dorina Kallogjeri; Sheila M Gaynor; Marilyn L Piccirillo; Raymond A Jean; Edward L Spitznagel; Jay F Piccirillo
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  Effects of Hospital Type and Distance on Lymph Node Assessment for Colon Cancer Among Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Patients in Appalachia.

Authors:  Pamela Farley Short; John R Moran; Tse-Chuan Yang; Fabian Camacho; Niraj J Gusani; Heath B Mackley; Stephen A Matthews; Roger T Anderson
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 3.929

10.  Comorbidity burden and guideline-concordant care for breast cancer.

Authors:  Gretchen Kimmick; Steven T Fleming; Susan A Sabatino; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Wenke Hwang; J Frank Wilson; Mary Jo Lund; Rosemary Cress; Roger T Anderson
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 5.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.