The Charlson Comorbidity Index in Registry-based Research Which Version to Use?
The Charlson Comorbidity Index in Registry-based Research Which Version to Use?
复制标题
DOI：
10.3414/me17-01-0051
复制
发表时间：
2017-01-01
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Lagergren, Jesper
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Brusselaers, Nele;Lagergren, Jesper
背景：合并症可能对生存率有重要影响，合并症评分常用于评估预后的研究。Charlson合并症指数是最广泛使用的，但已经出版了几个改编版本，所有使用略有不同的转换的国际疾病分类（ICD）coding.Objective：为了评估和量化合并症的Charlson合并症指数的注册为基础的研究，特别是如果旧的ICD版本将被使用。方法：使用系统性文献检索来识别Charlson科摩罗指数ICD编码的改编和修改，用于成人的通用目的，以英语发表。回翻译到ICD版本8和版本9进行了ICD-代码转换器的Statistics Sweden.Results：在总数，16项研究被确定报告ICD适应的Charlson Comorbian指数。英国皇家外科医学院将5个版本合并为一个改编和更新的版本，似乎适合于研究目的。他们的ICD-10编码回翻译成ICD-9和ICD-8根据他们提出的适应，并验证了以前版本的Charlson Comorrhagic Index.Conclusion：许多版本的Charlson Comorrhagic Index是并行使用的，所以明确报告的版本，准确的ICD编码和权重是必要的，以获得研究的透明度和再现性。然而，皇家外科医师学院的版本是最新的，易于使用，因此，可接受的合并症评分用于基于注册的研究，特别是手术患者。
Background: Comorbidities may have an important impact on survival, and comorbidity scores are often implemented in studies assessing prognosis. The Charlson Comorbidity index is most widely used, yet several adaptations have been published, all using slightly different conversions of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding.Objective: To evaluate which coding should be used to assess and quantify comorbidity for the Charlson Comorbidity Index for registry-based research, in particular if older ICD versions will be used.Methods: A systematic literature search was used to identify adaptations and modifications of the ICD-coding of the Charlson Comorbidity Index for general purpose in adults, published in English. Back-translation to ICD version 8 and version 9 was conducted by means of the ICD-code converter of Statistics Sweden.Results: In total, 16 studies were identified reporting ICD-adaptations of the Charlson Comorbidity Index. The Royal College of Surgeons in them United Kingdom combined 5 versions into, an adapted and updated version which appeared appropriate for research purposes. Their ICD-10 codes were back-translated into ICD-9 and ICD-8 according to their Proposed adaptations, and verified with previous versions of the Charlson Comorbidity Index.Conclusion: Many versions of the Charlson Comorbidity Index are used in parallel, so clear reporting of the version, exact ICD-coding and weighting is necessary to obtain transparency and reproducibility in research. Yet, the version of the Royal College of Surgeons is up-to-date and easy-to-use, and therefore an acceptable co-morbidity score to be used in registry-based research especially for surgical patients.