• norsk
    • English
  • English 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Pasientforløp
  • Pasientforløp for eldre med kronisk sykdom
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Pasientforløp
  • Pasientforløp for eldre med kronisk sykdom
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Measures of Multimorbidity and Morbidity Burden for Use in Primary Care and Community Settings: A Systematic Review and Guide

Huntley, A.L.; Johnson, R.; Purdy, S.; Valderas, J.M.; Salisbury, C.
Journal article
Thumbnail
View/Open
Artikkel (331.3Kb)
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2486833
Date
2012
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Pasientforløp for eldre med kronisk sykdom [117]
Original version
Huntley, A. L., Johnson, R., Purdy, S., Valderas, J. M. & Salisbury, C. (2012). Measures of Multimorbidity and Morbidity Burden for Use in Primary Care and Community Settings: A Systematic Review and Guide. Annals Of Family Medicine, 10(2), 134-141.   https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1363
Abstract
PURPOSE: Many patients consulting in primary care have multiple conditions (multimorbidity). Aims of this review were to identify measures of multimorbidity and morbidity burden suitable for use in research in primary care and community populations, and to investigate their validity in relation to anticipated associations with patient characteristics, process measures, and health outcomes.

METHODS: Studies were identified using searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to December 2009 and bibliographies.

RESULTS: Included were 194 articles describing 17 different measures. Commonly used measures included disease counts (n = 98), Chronic Disease Score (CDS)/RxRisk (n = 17), Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) System (n = 25), the Charlson index (n = 38), the Cumulative Index Illness Rating Scale (CIRS; n = 10) and the Duke Severity of Illness Checklist (DUSOI; n = 6). Studies that compared measures suggest their predictive validity for the same outcome differs only slightly. Evidence is strongest for the ACG System, Charlson index, or disease counts in relation to care utilization; for the ACG System in relation to costs; for Charlson index in relation to mortality; and for disease counts or Charlson index in relation to quality of life. Simple counts of diseases or medications perform almost as well as complex measures in predicting most outcomes. Combining measures can improve validity.

CONCLUSIONS: The measures most commonly used in primary care and community settings are disease counts, Charlson index, ACG System, CIRS, CDS, and DUSOI. Different measures are most appropriate according to the outcome of interest. Choice of measure will also depend on the type of data available. More research is needed to directly compare performance of different measures.
Publisher
Annals Of Family Medicine
Journal
Annals Of Family Medicine

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit
 

 

Browse

ArchiveCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit