Development of a multimorbidity index: Impact on quality of life using a rheumatoid arthritis cohort

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semarthrit.2015.06.010Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective

To develop a multimorbidity index (MMI) based on health-related quality of life (HRQol).

Methods

The index was developed in an observational RA cohort. In all, 40 morbidities recommended as core were identified using ICD-9 codes. MMIs of two types were calculated: one by enumerating morbidities (MMI.count) and the other by weighting morbidities based on their association with HRQol as assessed by EQ-5D in multiple linear regression analysis (using β-coefficients; MMI.weight). MMIs were compared to the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and externally validated in an international RA cohort (COMORA Study).

Results

In all, 544 out of 876 patients were multimorbid. MMI.count was in the range 1–16 (median = 2) and MMI.weight in the range 0–38 (median = 1). Both indices were more strongly associated with EQ-5D than CCI (Spearman: MMI.count = −0.20, MMI.weight = −0.26, and CCI = −0.10; p < 0.01). R2 obtained by linear regression using EQ-5D as a dependent variable and various indices as independent variables, adjusted for age and gender, was the highest for MMI (R2: MMI.count = 0.05, MMI.weight = 0.11, and CCI = 0.02). When accounting for clinical disease activity index (CDAI) R2 increased: MMI.count = 0.18, MMI.weight = 0.22, and CCI = 0.17, still showing higher values of MMI compared with CCI. External validation in different RA cohorts (COMORA, n = 3864) showed good performance of both indices (linear regression including age, gender, and disease activity R2 = 0.30 for both MMIs).

Conclusion

In our cohort, MMI based on EQ-5D performed better than did CCI. Findings were reproducible in another large RA cohort. Not much improvement was gained by weighting; therefore a simple counted index could be useful to control for the effect of multimorbidity on patient’s overall well-being.

Introduction

In the past decade, clinical and scientific interests in comorbidity and multimorbidity have increased [1], [2], [3], [4]. However, the concepts of comorbidity and multimorbidity are used interchangeably [5]. Both concepts refer to being afflicted by more than one disease at the same time, but approach the patient from different perspectives [6]. As inflammatory rheumatic conditions are systemic diseases, a high prevalence of coexisting conditions can be observed. The average rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patient has 1.6 additional conditions, increasing with age, disease duration, and/or disease activity [7], [8], [9]. Compared with the concept of comorbidity, where the index disease is at the center of interest, multimorbidity constitutes a more holistic, patient-centered concept [6].

To date, no gold standard exists on how to measure multimorbidity. A systematic literature review on assessing comorbidity and multimorbidity identified 39 different indices showing heterogeneity in terms of types and numbers of conditions included and outcomes the indices are based on. One of the most common indices used is the Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI) [10], which was originally developed as a prognostic index to predict 1-year mortality in a breast-cancer patient cohort. Research using a morbidity index based on mortality but studying outcomes different from death therefore might have misleading findings [11].

In chronic diseases, like RA, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is the main outcome, associated with physical function, pain, and global health. It reflects patients’ overall well-being, incorporating a multidimensional patient-centered concept. In a previous work we showed that an increasing number of morbidities leads to a decrease of HRQoL [12]. As rheumatology patients are typically afflicted by more than one disease, considering multimorbidity is of special importance when deciding on diagnostic or therapeutic strategies. Multimorbidity can cause polypharmacy, and an increasing treatment burden, which might also impact patients’ overall HRQoL. Therefore, an index reflecting multimorbidity that is based on HRQoL might be helpful to better address the disease-related aspects of patients’ overall well-being. This could also be useful for application in both clinical trials and epidemiological studies.

The purpose of this work was to create a multimorbidity index (MMI) based on HRQoL. We developed the MMI in RA patients, reflecting a typical cohort with a chronic condition. In further studies the new developed index should be validated in patients with different chronic rheumatic diseases and other conditions.

Section snippets

Study cohort

Patients were selected from the Brigham and Women’s Rheumatoid Arthritis Sequential Study (BRASS), a prospective observational RA cohort including more than 1300 RA patients with longitudinal follow-up [13]. In BRASS, patients are included at any time point within their disease course, irrespective of disease duration or treatment initiation. Information about demographics and RA disease activity [including clinical disease activity index (CDAI), fatigue, functional status (Multidimensional

Results

Baseline characteristics of 876 RA patients are depicted in Table 2, showing a typical RA clinical cohort. In total, 544 patients (62.1%) were considered as multimorbid, having at least one chronic condition in addition to RA. The mean number (SD) of morbid conditions was 2.62 (2.1). The highest prevalence was found for hypertension (23.7%), obesity (23.7%), cancer (13.0%), and osteoporosis (12.4%) (Table 1).

Discussion

We developed and validated an index that unifies two important multidimensional conceptsmultimorbidity and HRQoL. This MMI is novel, as existing indices are commonly comorbidity indices based on more specific outcomes, such as mortality, costs, or function, and therefore may not address a patient’s overall condition [2], [10], [18]. The MMI is the first index that systematically includes chronic conditions and may be useful across rheumatic diseases. Both MMIs (counted and weighted) can be

Conclusion

In conclusion, both versions of the MMI are valid tools to adjust for multimorbidity and its effect on patients’ overall well-being. This may be important for any treatment study when HRQoL is the outcome of interest as well as daily clinical routine when treating multimorbid RA patients. Both versions of the MMI outperformed the CCI, which is commonly used but not validated for outcomes such as HRQoL. Not much improvement was gained by weighting; therefore a simple counted index (MMI.count)

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank all patients and investigators who participated in this study.

References (29)

  • M. Fortin et al.

    Multimorbidity is common to family practice: is it commonly researched?

    Can Fam Physician

    (2005)
  • H. Radner et al.

    Multimorbidity and rheumatic conditions-enhancing the concept of comorbidity

    Nat Rev Rheumatol

    (2014)
  • S.E. Gabriel et al.

    Comorbidity in arthritis

    J Rheumatol

    (1999)
  • S. Norton et al.

    A study of baseline prevalence and cumulative incidence of comorbidity and extra-articular manifestations in RA and their impact on outcome

    Rheumatology (Oxford)

    (2012)
  • Cited by (54)

    • Evaluation and monitoring of established rheumatoid arthritis

      2019, Best Practice and Research: Clinical Rheumatology
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    The Brigham and Women’s Hospital Rheumatoid Arthritis Sequential Study (BRASS) was supported with Grants from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Crescendo Bioscience, and UCB. The COMORA study was conducted with the support of an unrestricted Grant from Roche Ltd, Switzerland. Helga Radner was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), Austria Project no J3476-B23.

    All authors were involved in drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, and all authors approved the final version to be published.

    View full text