Lieffers et al compared the 2 methods for predicting colorectal cancer survival in a research cohort of 574 patients. Growing evidence has found the Elixhauser method to be superior to the Charlson method for risk-adjustment. A comorbidity with pre-existing diagnosis before admission should be distinguished from a complication acquired during the hospital stay or later treatment. The Elixhauser comorbidity method is able to predict in-hospital mortality, length of hospitalization, and hospital charges. A more comprehensive set of 30 comorbidity measures was developed. 6, 7ДЄnother popular assessment method was introduced by Elixhauser et al in 1998 8 based on 1,779,167 California inpatient datasets. Multiple adaptations of the Charlson method have been created, including modifications to 17 categories (Charlson/Deyo), 4 modification of a specific International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modifications (ICD-CM) diagnosis codes (Charlson/Romano), 5 and a translation from ICD-9 codes to ICD-10 codes. This index has been validated by several studies 1вЂ“ 3 and is the most widely used comorbidity assessment used over the last several decades. Each diagnosis was assigned a weighting score, and the index was the sum of all scores. Mary Charlson and other authors defined 19 clinical diagnoses in a narrow population of fewer than 700 patients in 1987 by reviewing hospital charts and assessing their relevance to 1-year mortality. Utilization of the Elixhauser comorbidity method may be encouraged for risk adjustment in oral cancer study. The Elixhauser method is a superior comorbidity risk-adjustment model for oral cancer survival prediction. Furthermore, the Elixhauser comorbidity score outperformed the Charlson comorbidity score in continuous variable (HarrellвЂЉC, 0.654 vs 0.646) and category (HarrellвЂЉC, 0.658 vs 0.645). Elixhauser comorbidity method added higher discrimination, compared with the Charlson comorbidity method (HarrellвЂЉC, 0.677 vs 0.651). The median follow-up time was 30.1 months, and the 3-year overall survival was 61.6%. The mean age of the study cohort was 52вЂЉВ±вЂЉ10 years, and 94.9% of the patients were male. The prediction of survival was determined using measures of discrimination, including the Akaike information criterion and Harrell C (C-statistic).

The Elixhauser comorbidity score and Charlson comorbidity score were also calculated. Comorbidity was classified according to both the Charlson comorbidity and Elixhauser comorbidity based on the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision. Using the Taiwan National Health Insurance claims data (2008вЂ“2011), we acquired data regarding patientsвЂ™ characteristics, comorbidities, and survival from 3583 oral cancer patients.

This study compared these 2 comorbidity measures for predicting survival in oral cancer patients. Of the multiple methods used for evaluating the impact of comorbidities on survival, the Charlson and Elixhauser methods are most common. Cancer survival correlates not only with the features of primary malignancy but also with the degree of underlying comorbidities.

Spss code elixhauser comorbid score