2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Toolkit to Compute Time-Based Elixhauser Comorbidity Indices and Extension to Common Data Models

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The time-dependent study of comorbidities provides insight into disease progression and trajectory. We hypothesize that understanding longitudinal disease characteristics can lead to more timely intervention and improve clinical outcomes. As a first step, we developed an efficient and easy-to-install toolkit, the Time-based Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (TECI), which pre-calculates time-based Elixhauser comorbidities and can be extended to common data models (CDMs).

          Methods

          A Structured Query Language (SQL)-based toolkit, TECI, was built to pre-calculate time-specific Elixhauser comorbidity indices using data from a clinical data repository (CDR). Then it was extended to the Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (I2B2) and Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) CDMs.

          Results

          At the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), the TECI toolkit was successfully installed to compute the indices from CDR data, and the scores were integrated into the I2B2 and OMOP CDMs. Comorbidity scores calculated by TECI were validated against: scores available in the 2015 quarter 1–3 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) and scores calculated using the comorbidities using a previously validated algorithm on the 2015 quarter 4 NRD. Furthermore, TECI identified 18,846 UAMS patients that had changes in comorbidity scores over time (year 2013 to 2019). Comorbidities for a random sample of patients were independently reviewed, and in all cases, the results were found to be 100% accurate.

          Conclusions

          TECI facilitates the study of comorbidities within a time-dependent context, allowing better understanding of disease associations and trajectories, which has the potential to improve clinical outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data.

          This study attempts to develop a comprehensive set of comorbidity measures for use with large administrative inpatient datasets. The study involved clinical and empirical review of comorbidity measures, development of a framework that attempts to segregate comorbidities from other aspects of the patient's condition, development of a comorbidity algorithm, and testing on heterogeneous and homogeneous patient groups. Data were drawn from all adult, nonmaternal inpatients from 438 acute care hospitals in California in 1992 (n = 1,779,167). Outcome measures were those commonly available in administrative data: length of stay, hospital charges, and in-hospital death. A comprehensive set of 30 comorbidity measures was developed. The comorbidities were associated with substantial increases in length of stay, hospital charges, and mortality both for heterogeneous and homogeneous disease groups. Several comorbidities are described that are important predictors of outcomes, yet commonly are not measured. These include mental disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, obesity, coagulopathy, weight loss, and fluid and electrolyte disorders. The comorbidities had independent effects on outcomes and probably should not be simplified as an index because they affect outcomes differently among different patient groups. The present method addresses some of the limitations of previous measures. It is based on a comprehensive approach to identifying comorbidities and separates them from the primary reason for hospitalization, resulting in an expanded set of comorbidities that easily is applied without further refinement to administrative data for a wide range of diseases.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quality of care for patients with multiple chronic conditions: the role of comorbidity interrelatedness.

            Multimorbidity--the presence of multiple chronic conditions in a patient--has a profound impact on health, health care utilization, and associated costs. Definitions of multimorbidity in clinical care and research have evolved over time, initially focusing on a patient's number of comorbidities and the associated magnitude of required care processes, and later recognizing the potential influence of comorbidity characteristics on patient care and outcomes. In this article, we review the relationship between multimorbidity and quality of care, and discuss how this relationship may be mediated by the degree to which conditions interact with one another to generate clinical complexity (comorbidity interrelatedness). Drawing on established theoretical frameworks from cognitive engineering and biomedical informatics, we describe how interactions among conditions result in clinical complexity and may affect quality of care. We discuss how this comorbidity interrelatedness influences the value of existing quality guidelines and performance metrics, and describe opportunities to quantify this construct using data widely available through electronic health records. Incorporating comorbidity interrelatedness into conceptualizations of multimorbidity has the potential to enhance clinical and research efforts that aim to improve care for patients with multiple chronic conditions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evaluating common data models for use with a longitudinal community registry

              Objective: To evaluate common data models (CDMs) to determine which is best suited for sharing data from a large, longitudinal, electronic health record (EHR)-based community registry. Materials and Methods: Four CDMs were chosen from models in use for clinical research data: Sentinel v5.0 (referred to as the Mini-Sentinel CDM in previous versions), PCORnet v3.0 (an extension of the Mini-Sentinel CDM), OMOP v5.0, and CDISC SDTM v1.4. Each model was evaluated against 11 criteria adapted from previous research. The criteria fell into six categories: content coverage, integrity, flexibility, ease of querying, standards compatibility, and ease and extent of implementation. Results: The OMOP CDM accommodated the highest percentage of our data elements (76%), fared well on other requirements, and had broader terminology coverage than the other models. Sentinel and PCORnet fell short in content coverage with 37% and 48% matches respectively. Although SDTM accommodated a significant percentage of data elements (55% true matches), 45% of the data elements mapped to SDTM’s extension mechanism, known as Supplemental Qualifiers, increasing the number of joins required to query the data. Conclusion: The OMOP CDM best met the criteria for supporting data sharing from longitudinal EHR-based studies. Conclusions may differ for other uses and associated data element sets, but the methodology reported here is easily adaptable to common data model evaluation for other uses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Healthc Inform Res
                Healthc Inform Res
                Healthcare Informatics Research
                Korean Society of Medical Informatics
                2093-3681
                2093-369X
                July 2020
                31 July 2020
                : 26
                : 3
                : 193-200
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
                [2 ]Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
                [3 ]Department of Information Technology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
                [4 ]Department of Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
                [5 ]Department of Health Policy and Management, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Kevin W. Sexton, Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street, Slot 520–1, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA. Tel: +1-501-503-1982, E-mail: kevin.sexton@ 123456uams.edu ( https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1460-9867)
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4761-5972
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0389-0021
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6314-5683
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9332-1684
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8587-9189
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9752-4983
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2652-5935
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4942-1466
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6908-5872
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8978-1565
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1460-9867
                Article
                hir-26-3-193
                10.4258/hir.2020.26.3.193
                7438698
                32819037
                b34ed1e3-e30d-43f5-8f19-ffa15af78111
                © 2020 The Korean Society of Medical Informatics

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 05 February 2020
                : 29 March 2020
                : 16 April 2020
                : 17 April 2020
                : 17 April 2020
                Categories
                Original Article

                Bioinformatics & Computational biology
                comorbidity,multimorbidity,data warehouse,quality of care,retrospective studies,risk assessments,risk adjustment

                Comments

                Comment on this article