Skip to main content

Table 5 Multivariate logistic regression models: predicting acute health care utilisation

From: Relationship between health-related quality of life, comorbidities and acute health care utilisation, in adults with chronic conditions

ED presentation with 1 year ED presentations within 3 years
Predictor OR 95 % CI P Value Predictor OR 95 % CI P Value
AQOL utility score <0.37 1.35 0.95 to 1.91 0.094 AQOL utility score <0.37 1.58 1.16 to 2.13 0.003
Charlson Score (2–3) 1.48 1.09 to 2.00 0.011 Charlson Score (2–3) 1.71 1.32 to 2.23 <0.001
Charlson Score (4–5) 2.39 1.66 to 3.45 <0.001 Charlson Score (4–5) 1.96 1.39 to 2.76 <0.001
Charlson Score (≥6) 4.91 3.26 to 7.40 <0.001 Charlson Score (≥6) 6.36 3.96 to 10.20 <0.001
Correct classification: 70.0 %; Hosmer and Lemeshow χ2 (9) = 11.53, p = 0.117. Correct classification: 62.09 %; Hosmer and Lemeshow χ2 (8) = 34.00, p < 0 .00
Change in probability for AQoL utility score <0.37 at each level of the Charlson Score
  Coeff 95 % CI P Value   Coeff 95 % CI P Value
Charlson Score 2–3*AQOL 0.53 -0.11 to 0.12 0.106 Charlson Score 2–3*AQOL 0.11 0.04 to 0.19 0.003
Charlson Score 4–5*AQOL 0.19 1.00 to 0.28 <0.001 Charlson Score 4–5*AQOL 0.19 0.10 to 0.28 <0.001
Charlson Score (≥6)*AQOL 0.11 -0.12 to 0.22 0.079 Charlson Score ≥ 6*AQOL 0.12 0.01 to 0.23 0.040
Sensitivity 24.85 % False Negative 75.15 % Sensitivity 69.7 % False Negative 30.3 %
Specificity 92.12 % False Positive 7.88 % Specificity 52.2 % False Positive 47.8 %
Positive Predictive value 60.30 % False Positive 39.70 % Positive Predictive value 63.3 % False Positive 36.8 %
Negative Predictive value 71.8 % False Negative 28.20 % Negative Predictive value 59.4 % False Negative 40.6 %
Emergency Inpatient admissions within 1 year Inpatient admission within 3 years
Predictor OR 95 % CI P Value Predictor OR 95 % CI P Value
AQOL utility score <0.37 1.25 0.82 to 1.91 0.299 AQOL utility score <0.37 1.67 1.21 to 2. 30 0.002
Charlson Score (2–3) 1.57 1.10 to 2.24 0.012 Charlson Score (2–3) 1.99 1.51 to 2.63 <0.001
Charlson Score (4–5) 2.79 1.87 to 4.18 <0.001 Charlson Score (4–5) 2.62 1.85 to 3.73 <0.001
Charlson Score (≥6) 6.30 4.11 to 9.66 <0.001 Charlson Score (≥6) 8.76 5.59 to 13.73 <0.001
Correct classification: 77.5 %; Hosmer and Lemeshow χ2 (8) = 5.71, p = 0.456 Correct classification: 68.2 %; Hosmer and Lemeshow χ2 (8) = 4.95, p = 0 .666
Change in probability for AQoL utility score <0.37 at each level of the Charlson Score
  Coeff 95 % CI P Value   Coeff 95 % CI P Value
Charlson Score 2–3*AQOL 0.27 -0.13 to 0.08 0.316 Charlson Score 2–3*AQOL 0.11 0.04 to 0.18 0.003
Charlson Score 4–5*AQOL 0.16 0.08 to 0.25 <0.001 Charlson Score 4–5*AQOL 0.19 0.96 to 0.29 <0.001
Charlson Score (≥6)*AQOL 0.08 -0.03 to 0.19 0.147 Charlson Score ≥ 6*AQOL 0.11 -0.01 to 0.23 0.066
Sensitivity 18.2 % False Negative 81.8 % Sensitivity 44.3 % False Negative 55.7 %
Specificity 96.8 % False Positive 3.2 % Specificity 86.2 % False Positive 13.8 %
Positive Predictive value 65.0 % False Positive 35.0 % Positive Predictive value 70.1 % False Positive 29.9 %
Negative Predictive value 78.5 % False Negative 21.5 % Negative Predictive value 67.9 % False Negative f 32.1 %
  Interaction between HRQoL measured by AQoL and Charlson Score not significant, adjusted by age Not significant
  1. * = Interaction between Charlson Score and AQoL score in the multivariate model