4.4 Article

Validation study of Charlson Comorbidity Index in predicting mortality in Chinese older adults

Journal

GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 452-457

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ggi.12129

Keywords

Charlson Comorbidity Index; Chinese; mortality; older adults; validation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimThe Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) is commonly studied for predicting mortality, but there is no validation study of it in Chinese older adults. The objective of the present study was to validate the use of CCI in Chinese older adults for predicting mortality. MethodWe carried out a retrospective cohort study from 2004 to 2013 for patients discharged from a geriatric day hospital in Hong Kong. Comorbidity was quantified using CCI, and patients were divided into six groups according to their score of CCI: CCI-0, CCI-1, CCI-2, CCI-3, CCI-4 and CCI 5. Other data collected included demographics, and functional, nutritional, cognitive and social assessment. The outcome measure was 1-year mortality. ResultsAt 1-year follow up, 3.8% (n=17), 5.9% (n=37), 9.2% (n=35), 12.9% (n=20), 16.9% (n=23) and 19.3% (n=60) of CCI-0, CCI-1, CCI-2, CCI-3, CCI-4 and CCI 5 died, respectively (P<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that CCI-1, CCI-2, CCI-3, CCI-4 and CCI5 have a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.34 (confidence interval [CI] 1.04-2.12), 2.18 (CI 1.03-4.61), 3.44 (CI 1.52-7.81), 3.74 (CI 1.35-10.39) and 4.63 (CI 2.28-9.43), respectively, compared with CCI-0. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curves of CCI in predicting 1-year mortality for older adults was 0.68 (CI 0.64-0.72). ConclusionThere is a significant dose-response relationship in the hazard ratio between CCI and 1-year mortality in Chinese older adults, but involvements of functional, nutritional and social assessments are important for comprehensive quantification of health status in older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2014; 14: 452-457.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available