Is routine hospital episode data sufficient for identifying individuals with chronic kidney disease? A comparison study with laboratory data.

Internationally, investment in the availability of routine health care data for improving health, health surveillance and health care is increasing. We assessed the validity of hospital episode data for identifying individuals with chronic kidney disease compared to biochemistry data in a large population-based cohort, the Grampian Laboratory Outcomes, Morbidity and Mortality Study-II (n = 70,435). Grampian Laboratory Outcomes, Morbidity and Mortality Study-II links hospital episode data to biochemistry data for all adults in a health region with impaired kidney function and random samples of individuals with normal and unmeasured kidney function in 2003. We compared identification of individuals with chronic kidney disease by hospital episode data (based on International Classification of Diseases-10 codes) to the reference standard of biochemistry data (at least two estimated glomerular filtration rates <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) at least 90 days apart). Hospital episode data, compared to biochemistry data, identified a lower prevalence of chronic kidney disease and had low sensitivity (<10%) but high specificity (>97%). Using routine health care data from multiple sources offers the best opportunity to identify individuals with chronic kidney disease.

Charlson index scores from administrative data and case-note review compared favourably in a renal disease cohort.

BACKGROUND: The Charlson index is a widely used measure of comorbidity. The objective was to compare Charlson index scores calculated using administrative data to those calculated using case-note review (CNR) in relation to all-cause mortality and initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in the Grampian Laboratory Outcomes Mortality and Morbidity Study (GLOMMS-1) chronic kidney disease cohort. METHODS: Modified Charlson index scores were calculated using both data sources in the GLOMMS-1 cohort. Agreement between scores was assessed using the weighted Kappa. The association with outcomes was assessed using Poisson regression, and the performance of each was compared using net reclassification improvement. RESULTS: Of 3382 individuals, median age 78.5 years, 56% female, there was moderate agreement between scores derived from the two data sources (weighted kappa 0.41). Both scores were associated with mortality independent of a number of confounding factors. Administrative data Charlson scores were more strongly associated with death than CNR scores using net reclassification improvement. Neither score was associated with commencing RRT. CONCLUSION: Despite only moderate agreement, modified Charlson index scores from both data sources were associated with mortality. Neither was associated with commencing RRT. Administrative data compared favourably and may be superior to CNR when used in the Charlson index to predict mortality.

Approaches to ascertaining comorbidity information: validation of routine hospital episode data with clinician-based case note review.

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice, research, and increasingly health surveillance, planning and costing, there is a need for high quality information to determine comorbidity information about patients. Electronic, routinely collected healthcare data is capturing increasing amounts of clinical information as part of routine care. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of routine hospital administrative data to determine comorbidity, as compared with clinician-based case note review, in a large cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease. METHODS: A validation study using record linkage. Routine hospital administrative data were compared with clinician-based case note review comorbidity data in a cohort of 3219 patients with chronic kidney disease. To assess agreement, we calculated prevalence, kappa statistic, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. Subgroup analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Median age at index date was 76.3 years, 44% were male, 67% had stage 3 chronic kidney disease and 31% had at least three comorbidities. For most comorbidities, we found a higher prevalence recorded from case notes compared with administrative data. The best agreement was found for cerebrovascular disease (κ = 0.80) ischaemic heart disease (κ = 0.63) and diabetes (κ = 0.65). Hypertension, peripheral vascular disease and dementia showed only fair agreement (κ = 0.28, 0.39, 0.38 respectively) and smoking status was found to be poorly recorded in administrative data. The patterns of prevalence across subgroups were as expected and for most comorbidities, agreement between case note and administrative data was similar. Agreement was less, however, in older ages and for those with three or more comorbidities for some conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that hospital administrative comorbidity data compared moderately well with case note review data for cerebrovascular disease, ischaemic heart disease and diabetes, however there was significant under-recording of some other comorbid conditions, and particularly common risk factors.

Definitions of progression in chronic kidney disease--predictors and relationship to renal replacement therapy in a population cohort with a 6 year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is common, important and associated with increased healthcare needs due to CKD progression. Definitions of renal disease progression are multiple, and not always comparable. A measure of 'progression' directly comparable with renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation would identify 'progressors' in research and for healthcare planning. METHODS: The Grampian Laboratory Outcomes Morbidity and Mortality Study (GLOMMS-I) is a community cohort with CKD from 2003, followed up to June 2009 for (i) RRT initiation and (ii) 'progression': sustained reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by 15 mL/min/1.73 m2 (equivalent to CKD stage change), or to <10 mL/min/1.73 m2, whichever occurs first. Predictors were baseline demographics and comorbidity. The use of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes-2012 progression definition was also explored. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred and eighty-nine and 1044 had Stage 3 and 4 CKD, 44% were males. Overall, RRT initiation and progression rates were 0.97 and 3.50 per 100 patient-years (py). Females had significantly lower progression and RRT initiation rates. The progression rate was not dependent on CKD stage [incidence rate ratio (IRR) for Stage 4 (versus Stage 3) 0.9 (95% CI 0.8-1.2)], whereas the RRT initiation rate was [IRR 5.6 (95% CI 3.8-8.2)]. Increased proteinuria was associated with both greater RRT initiation and progression rates. CONCLUSIONS: Progression and RRT initiation rate ratios allow comparison of predictors of these outcomes. Higher rates of both in males suggest that greater RRT initiation rate is biological rather than due to preferential treatment. Similar progression but very different RRT initiation rates in Stage 3 and 4 CKD suggests that CKD stage effect on RRT initiation is a function of endpoint proximity rather than faster renal function deterioration.

What works with men? A systematic review of health promoting interventions targeting men.

BACKGROUND: Encouraging men to make more effective use of (preventive) health services is considered one way of improving their health. The aim of this study was to appraise the available evidence of effective interventions aimed at improving men's health. METHODS: Systematic review of relevant studies identified through 14 electronic databases and other information resources. Results were pooled within health topic and described qualitatively. RESULTS: Of 11,749 citations screened, 338 articles were assessed and 27 met our inclusion criteria. Most studies were male sex-specific, i.e. prostate cancer screening and testicular self-examination. Other topics included alcohol, cardiovascular disease, diet and physical activity, skin cancer and smoking cessation. Twenty-three interventions were effective or partially effective and 18 studies satisfied all quality criteria. CONCLUSION: Most of the existing evidence relates to male sex-specific health problems as opposed to general health concerns relevant to both men and women. There is little published evidence on how to improve men's uptake of services. We cannot conclude from this review that targeting men works better than providing services for all people. Large-scale studies are required to help produce evidence that is sufficiently robust to add to the small evidence base that currently exists in this field.