Browsing by Author "Porter, Joan"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Developing an adapted Charlson comorbidity index for ischemic stroke outcome studies
    (2019-12-03) Hall, Ruth E; Porter, Joan; Quan, Hude; Reeves, Mathew J
    Abstract Background The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) is commonly used to adjust for patient casemix. We reevaluated the CCI in an ischemic stroke (IS) cohort to determine whether the original seventeen comorbidities and their weights are relevant. Methods We identified an IS cohort (N = 6988) from the Ontario Stroke Registry (OSR) who were discharged from acute hospitals (N = 100) between April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2013. We used hospital discharge ICD-10-CA data to identify Charlson comorbidities. We developed a multivariable Cox model to predict one-year mortality retaining statistically significant (P < 0.05) comorbidities with hazard ratios ≥1.2. Hazard ratios were used to generate revised weights (1–6) for the comorbid conditions. The performance of the IS adapted Charlson comorbidity index (ISCCI) mortality model was compared to the original CCI using the c-statistic and continuous Net Reclassification Index (cNRI). Results Ten of the 17 Charlson comorbid conditions were retained in the ISCCI model and 7 had reassigned weights when compared to the original CCI model . The ISCCI model showed a small but significant increase in the c-statistic compared to the CCI for 30-day mortality (c-statistic 0.746 vs. 0.732, p = 0.009), but no significant increase in c-statistic for in-hospital or one-year mortality. There was also no improvement in the cNRI when the ISCCI model was compared to the CCI. Conclusions The ISCCI model had similar performance to the original CCI model. The key advantage of the ISCCI model is it includes seven fewer comorbidities and therefore easier to implement in situations where coded data is unavailable.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Sex differences in direct healthcare costs following stroke: a population-based cohort study
    (2021-06-29) Yu, Amy Y. X.; Krahn, Murray; Austin, Peter C.; Rashid, Mohammed; Fang, Jiming; Porter, Joan; Vyas, Manav V.; Bronskill, Susan E.; Smith, Eric E.; Swartz, Richard H.; Kapral, Moira K.
    Abstract Background The economic burden of stroke on the healthcare system has been previously described, but sex differences in healthcare costs have not been well characterized. We described the direct person-level healthcare cost in men and women as well as the various health settings in which costs were incurred following stroke. Methods In this population-based cohort study of patients admitted to hospital with stroke between 2008 and 2017 in Ontario, Canada, we used linked administrative data to calculate direct person-level costs in Canadian dollars in the one-year following stroke. We used a generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and a log link function to compare costs in women and men with and without adjustment for baseline clinical differences. We also assessed for an interaction between age and sex using restricted cubic splines to model the association of age with costs. Results We identified 101,252 patients (49% were women, median age [Q1-Q3] was 76 years [65–84]). Unadjusted costs following stroke were higher in women compared to men (mean ± standard deviation cost was $54,012 ± 54,766 for women versus $52,829 ± 59,955 for men, and median cost was $36,703 [$16,496–$72,227] for women versus $32,903 [$15,485–$66,007] for men). However, after adjustment, women had 3% lower costs compared to men (relative cost ratio and 95% confidence interval 0.97 [0.96,0.98]). The lower cost in women compared to men was most prominent among people aged over 85 years (p for interaction = 0.03). Women incurred lower costs than men in outpatient care and rehabilitation, but higher costs in complex continuing care, long-term care, and home care. Conclusions Patterns of resource utilization and direct medical costs were different between men and women after stroke. Our findings inform public payers of the drivers of costs following stroke and suggest the need for sex-based cost-effectiveness evaluation of stroke interventions with consideration of costs in all care settings.