Using the Functional Comorbidity Index with administrative workers’ compensation data: Utility, validity, and caveats

Abstract

BackgroundChronic health conditions impact worker outcomes but are challenging to measure using administrative workers’ compensation (WC) data. The Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI) was developed to predict functional outcomes in community‐based adult populations, but has not been validated for WC settings. We assessed a WC‐based FCI (additive index of 18 conditions) for identifying chronic conditions and predicting work outcomes.MethodsWC data were linked to a prospective survey in Ohio (N = 512) and Washington (N = 2,839). Workers were interviewed 6 weeks and 6 months after work‐related injury. Observed prevalence and concordance were calculated; survey data provided the reference standard for WC data. Predictive validity and utility for control of confounding were assessed using 6‐month work‐related outcomes.ResultsThe WC‐based FCI had high specificity but low sensitivity and was weakly associated with work‐related outcomes. The survey‐based FCI suggested more comorbidity in the Ohio sample (Ohio mean = 1.38; Washington mean = 1.14), whereas the WC‐based FCI suggested more comorbidity in the Washington sample (Ohio mean = 0.10; Washington mean = 0.33). In the confounding assessment, adding the survey‐based FCI to the base model moved the state effect estimates slightly toward null (<1% change). However, substituting the WC‐based FCI moved the estimate away from null (8.95% change).ConclusionsThe WC‐based FCI may be useful for identifying specific subsets of workers with chronic conditions, but less useful for chronic condition prevalence. Using the WC‐based FCI cross‐state appeared to introduce substantial confounding. We strongly advise caution—including state‐specific analyses with a reliable reference standard—before using a WC‐based FCI in studies involving multiple states.