Evaluation of the Impact Stratification Score in a Sample of Older Adult Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions.

Maria Orlando Edelen, Anthony Rodriguez, Nabeel Qureshi, Patricia M Herman, Ron D Hays
{"title":"Evaluation of the Impact Stratification Score in a Sample of Older Adult Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions.","authors":"Maria Orlando Edelen, Anthony Rodriguez, Nabeel Qureshi, Patricia M Herman, Ron D Hays","doi":"10.23937/2469-5858/1510141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate the utility of the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) in characterizing health-related disease burden for older adult patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The sample of 1226 older adult MCC patients (average age of 80, 51% female, and 89% White) completed the PROMIS-29 v2.1 profile that contains the 9 ISS items. The ISS was examined using factor analysis (i.e., correlated factors and bifactor models). We evaluated the relative validity of ISS compared with other PROMIS-29 scores using ratio of F-statistics from multivariate regressions predicting each PROMIS-29 score from patient chronic conditions and utilization patterns.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bifactor model results indicated essential unidimensionality, primarily reflecting one general construct (i.e., impact) and that, after accounting for impact, very little reliable variance remained in the two group factors. General impact scores were reliable (omegaH =.73). ISS scores were significantly higher according to older age, female gender, and Hispanic ethnicity, increased with increasing number of chronic conditions, and were strongly related to presence of most chronic conditions and healthcare utilization rates. Relative efficiency coefficients revealed that ISS scores were more strongly related to most chronic conditions relative to PROMIS pain intensity, physical health, and pain interference scores and outperformed the PROMIS-29 physical health summary score for several conditions including arthritis, diabetes, and high blood pressure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study presents evidence that the ISS is a sufficiently unidimensional and reliable measure that may be useful in characterizing health-related disease burden among older adult ambulatory patients with two or more chronic conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":91314,"journal":{"name":"Journal of geriatric medicine and gerontology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12067980/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of geriatric medicine and gerontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23937/2469-5858/1510141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the utility of the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) in characterizing health-related disease burden for older adult patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCC).

Methods: The sample of 1226 older adult MCC patients (average age of 80, 51% female, and 89% White) completed the PROMIS-29 v2.1 profile that contains the 9 ISS items. The ISS was examined using factor analysis (i.e., correlated factors and bifactor models). We evaluated the relative validity of ISS compared with other PROMIS-29 scores using ratio of F-statistics from multivariate regressions predicting each PROMIS-29 score from patient chronic conditions and utilization patterns.

Results: Bifactor model results indicated essential unidimensionality, primarily reflecting one general construct (i.e., impact) and that, after accounting for impact, very little reliable variance remained in the two group factors. General impact scores were reliable (omegaH =.73). ISS scores were significantly higher according to older age, female gender, and Hispanic ethnicity, increased with increasing number of chronic conditions, and were strongly related to presence of most chronic conditions and healthcare utilization rates. Relative efficiency coefficients revealed that ISS scores were more strongly related to most chronic conditions relative to PROMIS pain intensity, physical health, and pain interference scores and outperformed the PROMIS-29 physical health summary score for several conditions including arthritis, diabetes, and high blood pressure.

Conclusion: This study presents evidence that the ISS is a sufficiently unidimensional and reliable measure that may be useful in characterizing health-related disease burden among older adult ambulatory patients with two or more chronic conditions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评价老年多重慢性疾病患者的影响分层评分。
背景:评估影响分层评分(ISS)在描述老年多重慢性疾病(MCC)患者健康相关疾病负担方面的效用。方法:1226例老年MCC患者(平均年龄80岁,女性占51%,白人占89%)完成了包含9个ISS项目的promise -29 v2.1档案。利用因子分析(即相关因子和双因子模型)对国际空间站进行了检验。我们使用多变量回归的f -统计比率来评估ISS与其他promise -29评分的相对有效性,这些回归预测了患者慢性疾病和利用模式的每个promise -29评分。结果:双因素模型结果显示基本的单维性,主要反映一个一般结构(即影响),并且在考虑影响后,两组因素之间的可靠方差很小。总体影响评分是可靠的(omegaH =.73)。ISS得分在年龄较大、女性和西班牙裔种族中显著较高,随着慢性病数量的增加而增加,并且与大多数慢性病的存在和医疗保健利用率密切相关。相对效率系数显示ISS评分与PROMIS疼痛强度、身体健康和疼痛干扰评分的相关性更强,并且在包括关节炎、糖尿病和高血压在内的几种疾病中,ISS评分的表现优于PROMIS-29身体健康总结评分。结论:本研究提供的证据表明,ISS是一种足够单维且可靠的测量方法,可用于表征患有两种或两种以上慢性疾病的老年门诊患者的健康相关疾病负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Normal Weight Obesity and Normal Weight Central Obesity is Associated with Geriatric Syndromes in Hospitalized Older Adults Bullous Pemphigoid in Older Adults Treated with DPP4i: A Case Series Geriatric Medicine and the Challenges of Transition of Care in the Rural Health Sector An Analysis of Two Aged Patients with Pulmonary Tuberculosis A Case of Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia Complained of Anorexia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1