Adjustment for Multimorbidity in Estimations of the Burden of Diseases Using Korean NHIS Data

The current multimorbidity correction method in the Global Burden of Disease studies assumes the independent occurrence of diseases. Those studies use Monte-Carlo simulations to adjust for the presence of multiple disease conditions for all diseases. The present study investigated whether the above-mentioned assumption is reasonable based on the prevalence confirmed from actual data. This study compared multimorbidity-adjusted years of lived with disability (YLD) obtained by Monte-Carlo simulations and multimorbidity-adjusted YLD using multimorbidity prevalence derived from National Health Insurance Service data. The 5 most common diseases by sex and age groups were selected as diseases of interest. No significant differences were found between YLD estimations made using actual data and Monte-Carlo simulations, even though assumptions about the independent occurrence of diseases should be carefully applied. The prevalence was not well reflected according to disease characteristics in those under the age of 30, among whom there was a difference in YLD between the 2 methods. Therefore, when calculating the burden of diseases for Koreans over the age of 30, it is possible to calculate the YLD with correction for multimorbidity through Monte-Carlo simulation, but care should be taken with under-30s. It is useful to apply the efficiency and suitability of calibration for multiplicative methods using Monte-Carlo simulations in research on the domestic disease burden, especially in adults in their 30s and older. Further research should be carried out on multimorbidity correction methodology according to the characteristics of multiple diseases by sex and age.

Automated summary

This study investigates the assumption of independent occurrence of diseases in the current multimorbidity correction method used in Global Burden of Disease studies. The study compares multimorbidity-adjusted years of lived with disability (YLD) calculated using actual data and Monte-Carlo simulations. The results show that there are no significant differences between the two methods for individuals over the age of 30, but caution is needed when applying the method to individuals under 30 years old.