Impact of data source choice on multimorbidity measurement: a comparison study of 2.3 million individuals in the Welsh National Health Service.
Electronic health records
Epidemiology
Multimorbidity
Journal
BMC medicine
ISSN: 1741-7015
Titre abrégé: BMC Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101190723
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 08 2023
15 08 2023
Historique:
received:
11
04
2023
accepted:
03
07
2023
medline:
17
8
2023
pubmed:
16
8
2023
entrez:
15
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Measurement of multimorbidity in research is variable, including the choice of the data source used to ascertain conditions. We compared the estimated prevalence of multimorbidity and associations with mortality using different data sources. A cross-sectional study of SAIL Databank data including 2,340,027 individuals of all ages living in Wales on 01 January 2019. Comparison of prevalence of multimorbidity and constituent 47 conditions using data from primary care (PC), hospital inpatient (HI), and linked PC-HI data sources and examination of associations between condition count and 12-month mortality. Using linked PC-HI compared with only HI data, multimorbidity was more prevalent (32.2% versus 16.5%), and the population of people identified as having multimorbidity was younger (mean age 62.5 versus 66.8 years) and included more women (54.2% versus 52.6%). Individuals with multimorbidity in both PC and HI data had stronger associations with mortality than those with multimorbidity only in HI data (adjusted odds ratio 8.34 [95% CI 8.02-8.68] versus 6.95 (95%CI 6.79-7.12] in people with ≥ 4 conditions). The prevalence of conditions identified using only PC versus only HI data was significantly higher for 37/47 and significantly lower for 10/47: the highest PC/HI ratio was for depression (14.2 [95% CI 14.1-14.4]) and the lowest for aneurysm (0.51 [95% CI 0.5-0.5]). Agreement in ascertainment of conditions between the two data sources varied considerably, being slight for five (kappa < 0.20), fair for 12 (kappa 0.21-0.40), moderate for 16 (kappa 0.41-0.60), and substantial for 12 (kappa 0.61-0.80) conditions, and by body system was lowest for mental and behavioural disorders. The percentage agreement, individuals with a condition identified in both PC and HI data, was lowest in anxiety (4.6%) and highest in coronary artery disease (62.9%). The use of single data sources may underestimate prevalence when measuring multimorbidity and many important conditions (especially mental and behavioural disorders). Caution should be used when interpreting findings of research examining individual and multiple long-term conditions using single data sources. Where available, researchers using electronic health data should link primary care and hospital inpatient data to generate more robust evidence to support evidence-based healthcare planning decisions for people with multimorbidity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Measurement of multimorbidity in research is variable, including the choice of the data source used to ascertain conditions. We compared the estimated prevalence of multimorbidity and associations with mortality using different data sources.
METHODS
A cross-sectional study of SAIL Databank data including 2,340,027 individuals of all ages living in Wales on 01 January 2019. Comparison of prevalence of multimorbidity and constituent 47 conditions using data from primary care (PC), hospital inpatient (HI), and linked PC-HI data sources and examination of associations between condition count and 12-month mortality.
RESULTS
Using linked PC-HI compared with only HI data, multimorbidity was more prevalent (32.2% versus 16.5%), and the population of people identified as having multimorbidity was younger (mean age 62.5 versus 66.8 years) and included more women (54.2% versus 52.6%). Individuals with multimorbidity in both PC and HI data had stronger associations with mortality than those with multimorbidity only in HI data (adjusted odds ratio 8.34 [95% CI 8.02-8.68] versus 6.95 (95%CI 6.79-7.12] in people with ≥ 4 conditions). The prevalence of conditions identified using only PC versus only HI data was significantly higher for 37/47 and significantly lower for 10/47: the highest PC/HI ratio was for depression (14.2 [95% CI 14.1-14.4]) and the lowest for aneurysm (0.51 [95% CI 0.5-0.5]). Agreement in ascertainment of conditions between the two data sources varied considerably, being slight for five (kappa < 0.20), fair for 12 (kappa 0.21-0.40), moderate for 16 (kappa 0.41-0.60), and substantial for 12 (kappa 0.61-0.80) conditions, and by body system was lowest for mental and behavioural disorders. The percentage agreement, individuals with a condition identified in both PC and HI data, was lowest in anxiety (4.6%) and highest in coronary artery disease (62.9%).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of single data sources may underestimate prevalence when measuring multimorbidity and many important conditions (especially mental and behavioural disorders). Caution should be used when interpreting findings of research examining individual and multiple long-term conditions using single data sources. Where available, researchers using electronic health data should link primary care and hospital inpatient data to generate more robust evidence to support evidence-based healthcare planning decisions for people with multimorbidity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37582755
doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-02970-z
pii: 10.1186/s12916-023-02970-z
pmc: PMC10426056
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
309Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/W000253/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : NIHR202639
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
Trials. 2020 Feb 26;21(1):228
pubmed: 32102686
Lancet Public Health. 2021 Aug;6(8):e587-e597
pubmed: 34166630
CMAJ. 2020 Feb 3;192(5):E107-E114
pubmed: 32015079
BMJ. 2023 Mar 22;380:e072098
pubmed: 36948515
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jan 09;13:16
pubmed: 23302258
CMAJ. 2013 Mar 19;185(5):E221-8
pubmed: 23422444
Eur J Endocrinol. 2022 Mar 10;186(4):E1-E6
pubmed: 35157608
PLoS Med. 2023 Apr 4;20(4):e1004208
pubmed: 37014910
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019 Dec 1;26(12):1545-1559
pubmed: 31329239
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Sep 11;20(1):858
pubmed: 32917193
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 29;12(4):e057017
pubmed: 35487738
Lancet. 2012 Jul 7;380(9836):37-43
pubmed: 22579043
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82
pubmed: 23092060
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2019 Jul 24;11(3):178-187
pubmed: 32419908
Br J Gen Pract. 2023 Mar 30;73(729):e249-e256
pubmed: 36997222
PLoS Med. 2022 Mar 7;19(3):e1003931
pubmed: 35255092
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Dec 1;17(1):494
pubmed: 27905906
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Sep 04;9:157
pubmed: 19732426
Lancet Public Health. 2020 Oct;5(10):e543-e550
pubmed: 32979305
Med Care. 2017 Aug;55(8):789-796
pubmed: 28598890
Future Healthc J. 2018 Oct;5(3):207-212
pubmed: 31098568
BMJ Med. 2022 Jul 27;1(1):e000247
pubmed: 36936594
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022 Apr 13;29(5):770-778
pubmed: 35165743
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005 Jul;14(7):443-51
pubmed: 15898131
Lancet Digit Health. 2019 May 20;1(2):e63-e77
pubmed: 31650125
BMJ. 2021 Apr 7;373:n826
pubmed: 33827854
BMJ. 2013 May 20;346:f2350
pubmed: 23692896
BMC Geriatr. 2006 Mar 23;6:5
pubmed: 16556306
Annu Rev Public Health. 2016;37:61-81
pubmed: 26667605