Lisa C Lindley1, Christine A Fortney2. 1. 1 College of Nursing, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA. 2. 2 Martha S. Pitzer Center for Women, Children Youth, College of Nursing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One widely accepted approach to identify children with life-limiting health problems is the complex chronic conditions (CCCs) classification system. Although considered the "gold standard" for classifying children with serious illness, little is known about its performance, especially among infants. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: This research examined the prevalence of CCCs and the infant characteristics related to a CCC classification. METHODS: Multivariate regression analysis was conducted with 2012 Kids' Inpatient Database, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data files, using a national sample of infant decedents less than 1 year. RESULTS: Our findings showed that 40% of the infants were classified with a CCC. African Americans were negatively associated with a CCC classification (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.543-0.731). When infants had other insurance coverage, they were less likely (aOR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.537-0.748) to have a CCC classification. Infants who resided in nonurban areas (aOR = 1.21; 95% CI =1.034-1.415) and had comorbidities (aOR = 38.19; 95% CI = 33.12-44.04) had greater odds of having a CCC classification. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggested that the infants are not commonly classified with a CCC and highlighted the significant variation in race with African American infants exhibiting different CCC classifications than Caucasian infants. Given the importance of reducing disparities in palliative care, critical attention to using CCC classifications in research is warranted.
BACKGROUND: One widely accepted approach to identify children with life-limiting health problems is the complex chronic conditions (CCCs) classification system. Although considered the "gold standard" for classifying children with serious illness, little is known about its performance, especially among infants. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: This research examined the prevalence of CCCs and the infant characteristics related to a CCC classification. METHODS: Multivariate regression analysis was conducted with 2012 Kids' Inpatient Database, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data files, using a national sample of infant decedents less than 1 year. RESULTS: Our findings showed that 40% of the infants were classified with a CCC. African Americans were negatively associated with a CCC classification (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.543-0.731). When infants had other insurance coverage, they were less likely (aOR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.537-0.748) to have a CCC classification. Infants who resided in nonurban areas (aOR = 1.21; 95% CI =1.034-1.415) and had comorbidities (aOR = 38.19; 95% CI = 33.12-44.04) had greater odds of having a CCC classification. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggested that the infants are not commonly classified with a CCC and highlighted the significant variation in race with African American infants exhibiting different CCC classifications than Caucasian infants. Given the importance of reducing disparities in palliative care, critical attention to using CCC classifications in research is warranted.
Authors: John S Hughes; Richard F Averill; Jon Eisenhandler; Norbert I Goldfield; John Muldoon; John M Neff; James C Gay Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Chris Feudtner; Dimitri A Christakis; Frederick J Zimmerman; John H Muldoon; John M Neff; Thomas D Koepsell Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Shannon M Hudson; Martina Mueller; William H Hester; Gayenell S Magwood; Susan D Newman; Marilyn A Laken Journal: J Spec Pediatr Nurs Date: 2014-03-03 Impact factor: 1.260
Authors: Tamara D Simon; Mary Lawrence Cawthon; Susan Stanford; Jean Popalisky; Dorothy Lyons; Peter Woodcox; Margaret Hood; Alex Y Chen; Rita Mangione-Smith Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-05-12 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Jay G Berry; Sara L Toomey; Alan M Zaslavsky; Ashish K Jha; Mari M Nakamura; David J Klein; Jeremy Y Feng; Shanna Shulman; Vincent W Chiang; Vincent K Chiang; William Kaplan; Matt Hall; Mark A Schuster Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-01-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lisa C Lindley; Radion Svynarenko; Kim Mooney-Doyle; Annette Mendola; Wendy C Naumann; Robin Harris Journal: J Cardiovasc Nurs Date: 2021-12-21 Impact factor: 2.468