Lowering the default number of opioid pills prescribed in an EMR system is a simple, effective, cheap, and potentially scalable intervention to change prescriber behavior and decrease the amount of opioid medication prescribed after procedures.
Background
Multiple valid comorbidity indices exist to quantify the presence and role of comorbidities in cancer patient survival. Our goal was to compare chart-based Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 index (ACE-27), and claims-based Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) methods of identifying comorbid ailments, and their prognostic ability.
Study Design
Prospective cohort study of 6138 newly-diagnosed cancer patients at 12 different institutions. Participating registrars were trained to collect comorbidities from the abstracted chart using the ACE-27 method. ACE-27 assessment was compared with comorbidities captured through hospital discharge face-sheets using ICD-coding. The prognostic accomplishments of each comorbidity method was examined using follow-up data assessed at 24 months after data abstraction.
Results
Distribution of the ACE-27 scores was: “None” for 1453 (24%) of the patients; “Mild” for 2388 (39%); “Moderate” for 1344 (22%) and “Severe” for 950 (15%) of the patients. Deyo’s adaption of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) identified 4265 (69%) patients with a CCI score of 0, and the remaining 31% had CCI scores of 1 (n=1341, 22%), 2 (n=365, 6%), or 3 or more (n=167, 3%). Of the 4265 patients with a CCI score of 0, 394 (9%) were coded with severe comorbidities based on ACE-27 method. A higher comorbidity score was significantly associated with higher risk of death for both comorbidity indices. The multivariable Cox model including both comorbidity indices had the best performance (Nagelkerke’s R-square=0.37) and the best discrimination (c-index=0.827).
Conclusion
The number, type, and overall severity of comorbid ailments identified by chart- and claims-based approaches in newly-diagnosed cancer patients were notably different. Both indices were prognostically significant and able to provide unique prognostic information.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.