Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
IRIS
Background: To know burden disease of a patient is a key point for clinical practice and research, especially in the elderly. Charlson’s Comorbidity Index (CCI) is the most widely used rating system, but when diagnoses are not available therapy-based comorbidity indices (TBCI) are an alternative. However, their performance is debated. This study compares the relations between Drug Derived Complexity Index (DDCI), Medicines Comorbidity Index (MCI), Chronic Disease Score (CDS), and severe multimorbidity, according to the CCI classification, in the elderly. Methods: Logistic regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis were conducted on two samples from Italy: 2579 nursing home residents (Korian sample) and 7505 older adults admitted acutely to geriatric or internal medicine wards (REPOSI sample). Results: The proportion of subjects with severe comorbidity rose with TBCI score increment, but the Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the CDS (Korian: 0.70, REPOSI: 0.79) and MCI (Korian: 0.69, REPOSI: 0.81) were definitely better than the DDCI (Korian: 0.66, REPOSI: 0.74). All TBCIs showed low Positive Predictive Values (maximum: 0.066 in REPOSI and 0.317 in Korian) for the detection of severe multimorbidity. Conclusion: CDS and MCI were better predictors of severe multimorbidity in older adults than DDCI, according to the CCI classification. A high CCI score was related to a high TBCI. However, the opposite is not necessarily true probably because of non-evidence-based prescriptions or physicians’ prescribing attitudes. TBCIs did not appear selective for detecting of severe multimorbidity, though they could be used as a measure of disease burden, in the absence of other solutions.
Comparison between drug therapy-based comorbidity indices and the Charlson Comorbidity Index for the detection of severe multimorbidity in older subjects
Background: To know burden disease of a patient is a key point for clinical practice and research, especially in the elderly. Charlson’s Comorbidity Index (CCI) is the most widely used rating system, but when diagnoses are not available therapy-based comorbidity indices (TBCI) are an alternative. However, their performance is debated. This study compares the relations between Drug Derived Complexity Index (DDCI), Medicines Comorbidity Index (MCI), Chronic Disease Score (CDS), and severe multimorbidity, according to the CCI classification, in the elderly. Methods: Logistic regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis were conducted on two samples from Italy: 2579 nursing home residents (Korian sample) and 7505 older adults admitted acutely to geriatric or internal medicine wards (REPOSI sample). Results: The proportion of subjects with severe comorbidity rose with TBCI score increment, but the Area Under the Curve (AUC) for the CDS (Korian: 0.70, REPOSI: 0.79) and MCI (Korian: 0.69, REPOSI: 0.81) were definitely better than the DDCI (Korian: 0.66, REPOSI: 0.74). All TBCIs showed low Positive Predictive Values (maximum: 0.066 in REPOSI and 0.317 in Korian) for the detection of severe multimorbidity. Conclusion: CDS and MCI were better predictors of severe multimorbidity in older adults than DDCI, according to the CCI classification. A high CCI score was related to a high TBCI. However, the opposite is not necessarily true probably because of non-evidence-based prescriptions or physicians’ prescribing attitudes. TBCIs did not appear selective for detecting of severe multimorbidity, though they could be used as a measure of disease burden, in the absence of other solutions.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11564/741806
Citazioni
1
5
4
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.