IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0255602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of comorbidity measures for predicting mortality after elective hip and knee replacement: A cohort study of data from the National Joint Registry in England and Wales

Author

Listed:
  • Chris M Penfold
  • Michael R Whitehouse
  • Ashley W Blom
  • Andrew Judge
  • J Mark Wilkinson
  • Adrian Sayers

Abstract

Background: The risk of mortality following elective total hip (THR) and knee replacements (KR) may be influenced by patients’ pre-existing comorbidities. There are a variety of scores derived from individual comorbidities that can be used in an attempt to quantify this. The aims of this study were to a) identify which comorbidity score best predicts risk of mortality within 90 days or b) determine which comorbidity score best predicts risk of mortality at other relevant timepoints (30, 45, 120 and 365 days). Patients and methods: We linked data from the National Joint Registry (NJR) on primary elective hip and knee replacements performed between 2011–2015 with pre-existing conditions recorded in the Hospital Episodes Statistics. We derived comorbidity scores (Charlson Comorbidity Index—CCI, Elixhauser, Hospital Frailty Risk Score—HFRS). We used binary logistic regression models of all-cause mortality within 90-days and within 30, 45, 120 and 365-days of the primary operation using, adjusted for age and gender. We compared the performance of these models in predicting all-cause mortality using the area under the Receiver-operator characteristics curve (AUROC) and the Index of Prediction Accuracy (IPA). Results: We included 276,594 elective primary THRs and 338,287 elective primary KRs for any indication. Mortality within 90-days was 0.34% (N = 939) after THR and 0.26% (N = 865) after KR. The AUROC for the CCI and Elixhauser scores in models of mortality ranged from 0.78–0.81 after THR and KR, which slightly outperformed models with ASA grade (AUROC = 0.77–0.78). HFRS performed similarly to ASA grade (AUROC = 0.76–0.78). The inclusion of comorbidities prior to the primary operation offers no improvement beyond models with comorbidities at the time of the primary. The discriminative ability of all prediction models was best for mortality within 30 days and worst for mortality within 365 days. Conclusions: Comorbidity scores add little improvement beyond simpler models with age, gender and ASA grade for predicting mortality within one year after elective hip or knee replacement. The additional patient-specific information required to construct comorbidity scores must be balanced against their prediction gain when considering their utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris M Penfold & Michael R Whitehouse & Ashley W Blom & Andrew Judge & J Mark Wilkinson & Adrian Sayers, 2021. "A comparison of comorbidity measures for predicting mortality after elective hip and knee replacement: A cohort study of data from the National Joint Registry in England and Wales," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-19, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0255602
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0255602
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0255602&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0255602?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:pone00:0255602. 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.