The C5-75 Program: Meeting the Need for Efficient, Pragmatic Frailty Screening and Management in Primary Care

Frailty Screening in Primary Care-Based Memory Clinics: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Findings

We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of frailty screening using handgrip strength with gait speed measures within four primary care-based memory clinics in Ontario. This mixed methods quality improvement initiative examined the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of frailty screening from the perspective of patients (N = 216), care partners (N = 142), and healthcare providers (N = 9). Frailty screening was well-received by patients and care partners and perceived as quick and easy to administer and integrate into assessment processes by healthcare providers at all four memory clinics. The ease of integrating frailty screening into clinic processes was a key factor facilitating implementation; few challenges or suggestions for improvement were identified. All four clinics plan to continue frailty screening, three using the methods adopted in this study. Integrating frailty screening into memory assessments is feasible and acceptable and, given the interactional relationship between frailty and dementia, provides a significant opportunity to improve health outcomes for older adults.

Frailty prevalence and efficient screening in primary care-based memory clinics

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the prevalence of frailty among patients with memory concerns attending a primary care-based memory clinic.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe the prevalence of frailty among patients attending a primary care-based memory clinic and to determine if prevalence rates differ based on the screening tool that is used.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective medical record review for all consecutive patients assessed in a primary care-based memory clinic over 8 months. Frailty was measured in 258 patients using the Fried frailty criteria, which relies on physical measures, and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), which relies on functional status. Weighted kappa statistics were calculated to compare the Fried frailty and the CFS.

RESULTS

The prevalence of frailty was 16% by Fried criteria and 48% by the CFS. Agreement between Fried frailty and CFS was fair for CFS 5+ (kappa = 0.22; 95% confidence interval: 0.13, 0.32) and moderate for CFS 6+ (kappa = 0.47; 0.34, 0.61). Dual-trait measures of hand grip strength with gait speed were found to be a valid proxy for Fried frailty phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

Among primary care patients with memory concerns, frailty prevalence rates differed based on the measure used. Screening for frailty in this population using measures relying on physical performance may be a more efficient approach for persons already at risk of further health instability from cognitive impairment. Our findings demonstrate how measure selection should be based on the objectives and context in which frailty screening occurs.

A nurse-led comprehensive geriatric assessment intervention in primary care: A feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial

AIM

To determine the feasibility of a nurse-led, primary care-based comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) intervention.

DESIGN

A feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

The trial was conducted in six general practices in the United Kingdom from May 2018 to April 2020. Participants were moderately/severely frail people aged 65 years and older living at home. Clusters were randomly assigned to the intervention arm control arms. A CGA was delivered to the intervention participants, with control participants receiving usual care. Study outcomes related to feasibility of the intervention and of conducting the trial including recruitment and retention. A range of outcome measures of quality of life, function, loneliness, self-determination, mortality, hospital admission/readmission and number of prescribed medications were evaluated.

RESULTS

All pre-specified feasibility criteria relating to recruitment and retention were met with 56 participants recruited in total (30 intervention and 26 control). Retention was high with 94.6% of participants completing 13-week follow-up and 87.5% (n = 49) completing 26-week follow-up. All outcome measures instruments met feasibility criteria relating to completeness and responsiveness over time. Quality of life was recommended as the primary outcome for a definitive trial with numbers of prescribed medications as a secondary outcome measure.

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to implement and conduct a randomized controlled trial of a nurse-led, primary care-based CGA intervention.

IMPACT

The study provided evidence on the feasibility of a CGA intervention for older people delivered in primary care. It provides information to maximize the success of a definitive trial of the clinical effectiveness of the intervention.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patient and public representatives were involved in the study design including intervention development and production of participant-facing documentation. Representatives served on the trial management and steering committees and, as part of this role, interpreted feasibility data. ISRCTN Number: 74345449.

Frailty screening in older adults: is annual screening necessary in primary care?

BACKGROUND

The Case-finding for Complex Chronic Conditions in Adults 75+ (C5-75) involves annual frailty screening in primary care using dual-trait screening measures of handgrip strength and gait speed, with additional screening for co-existing conditions in those deemed frail.

OBJECTIVE

To identify low-risk individuals who could be screened for frailty every 2 years, rather than annually.

METHODS

This study examined a prospective cohort of patients who completed at least two annual C5-75 screenings between April 2014 and December 2018. Handgrip strength and gait speed on initial assessment were categorized based on proximity to frailty thresholds and were used to predict frailty risk on the second assessment. We used Fisher's exact test to assess differences in risk. Logistic regression models tested associations between independent variables of age, patient activity level, falls history, grip strength and gait speed on first assessment and dependent variable of frailty on subsequent assessment.

RESULTS

Analyses included 571 patients with two annual assessments. Frailty risk on the second assessment was significantly higher for patients who had gait speed or grip strength within 20% of the frailty threshold (5.7%), compared with the other categories (0.7%, 0.9%, 0%; P = 0.002); 60% of patients fell within these lower risk categories. Controlling for grip strength and gait speed, no other measures had significant associations with frailty risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that 60% patients are at low risk (<1%) of transitioning to frailty by the next annual assessment. Reducing screening frequency from annually to every 2 years may be appropriate for these patients.