IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0154627.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prediction of Mortality in Incident Hemodialysis Patients: A Validation and Comparison of CHADS2, CHA2DS2, and CCI Scores

Author

Listed:
  • Hsun Yang
  • Yi-Hsin Chen
  • Teng-Fu Hsieh
  • Shiun-Yang Chuang
  • Ming-Ju Wu

Abstract

Background: The CHADS2 and CHA2DS2 scores are usually applied for stroke prediction in atrial fibrillation patients, and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) is a commonly used scale for assessing morbidity. The role in assessing mortality with score system in hemodialysis is not clear and comparisons are lacking. We aimed at evaluating CHADS2, CHA2DS2, and CCI scores to predict mortality in incident hemodialysis patients. Methods: Using data from the Nation Health Insurance system of Taiwan (NHIRD) from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2009, individuals ≧20 y/o who began hemodialysis identified by procedure code and receiving dialysis for > 3 months were included for our study. Renal transplantation patients after dialysis or PD patients were excluded. We calculated the CHADS2, CHA2DS2, and CCI score according to the ICD-9 code and categorized the patients into three groups in each system: 0–1, 2–3, over 4. A total of 3046 incident hemodialysis patients enrolled from NHIRD were examined for an association between the separate scoring systems (CHADS2, CHA2DS2, and CCI score) and mortality. Results: CHADS2 and CHA2DS2 scores revealed good predictive value for total mortality (CHADS2 AUC = 0.805; CHA2DS2 AUC = 0.790). However, the CCI score did not reveal a similarly satisfying result (AUC = 0.576). Conclusions: Our results show that CHADS2 and CHA2DS2 scores can be applied for mortality prediction in incident hemodialysis patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Hsun Yang & Yi-Hsin Chen & Teng-Fu Hsieh & Shiun-Yang Chuang & Ming-Ju Wu, 2016. "Prediction of Mortality in Incident Hemodialysis Patients: A Validation and Comparison of CHADS2, CHA2DS2, and CCI Scores," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0154627
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154627
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0154627
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0154627&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0154627?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0154627. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.