Burns in the Elderly

Burns in the elderly are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Frailty is an important indicator of patient health and physiologic reserve. Comorbidities and typical age-related changes significantly impact the outcomes of elderly burn patients and decisions made during their burn care. It is essential to have early and thorough discussions about the goals of care and rehabilitation plans. Physiologic changes that occur from aging cause slower wound healing and may make operative treatment more challenging, although techniques such as autographing, skin substitutes, and flaps may all play a role in treating this patient population.

Factors Associated with the Rehabilitation of the Older Adult Burn Patient

The number of older people is increasing and as a result so will the number of older adult patients who present with a burn injury. There are distinct differences between older and younger burn patients, particularly with respect to skin anatomy and physiology and frailty. These are 2 important factors that influence the rehabilitation efforts with respect to older adult burn patients. There has been minimal work done studying the specific rehabilitation of older adult burn patients. More work is needed to fully understand the rehabilitation needs of older adult burn patients.

Reliability and validity of a frailty assessment tool in specialized burn care, a retrospective multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Frailty is a predictor of adverse outcomes in elderly patients. The Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is an often-used frailty assessment instrument. However, the CFS's reliability and validity in patients with burn injuries are unknown. This study aimed to assess the CFS's inter-rater reliability and validity (predictive validity, known group validity and convergent validity) in patients with burn injuries treated to specialized burn care.

METHODS

A retrospective multicentre cohort study was conducted in all three Dutch burn centres. Patients aged ≥ 50 years with burn injuries, with a primary admission in 2015-2018, were included. Based on information in the electronic patient files, a research team member scored the CFS retrospectively. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using Krippendorff's α. Validity was assessed using logistic regression analysis. Patients with a CFS ≥ 5 were considered frail.

RESULTS

In total, 540 patients were included, with a mean age of 65.8 years (SD 11.5) and a Total Body Surface Area (TBSA) burned of 8.5%. The CFS was used to assess frailty in 540 patients and the reliability of the CFS was scored for 212 patients. Mean CFS was 3.4(SD 2.0). Inter-rater reliability was adequate, Krippendorff's α 0.69 (95%CI 0.62-0.74). A positive frailty screening was predictive of a non-home discharge location (OR 3.57, 95%CI 2.16-5.93), a higher in-hospital mortality rate (OR 1.06-8.77), and a higher mortality rate within 12 months after discharge (OR 4.61, 95%CI 1.99-10.65) after adjustment for age, TBSA, and inhalation injury. Frail patients were more likely to be older (for<70 vs. ≥70 years odds ratio 2.88, 95%CI 1.95-4.25) and their comorbidities were more severe (ASA ≥3 vs 1-2 OR 6.43, 95%CI 4.26-9.70) (known group validity). The CFS was significantly related (rSpearman=0.55) to the Dutch Safety Management System (DSMS) frailty screening, reflecting a fair-good correlation between the CFS and DSMS frailty screening outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The Clinical Frailty scale is reliable and has shown its validity, including its association with adverse outcomes in patients with burn injury admitted to specialized burn care. Early frailty assessment with the CFS must be considered, to optimize early recognition and treatment of frailty.

Frailty as a predictor of adverse outcomes in burn patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The identification of new prognostic tools for the prediction of burn patients' morbidity outcomes is necessary. Considering the feasibility of frailty assessment in the clinical setting, we aim to systematically review the literature on the associations between frailty and adverse outcomes in burn patients.

METHODS

Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE (through PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase from their inception up to 8 September 2022. Included studies were those that used frailty indices to predict adverse outcomes in burn patients. The quality assessment was done using the National, Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) checklist. The results were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

We included 18 studies. The sample size among the included studies varied between 42-1615 patients. There were 12 research articles and 6 conference abstracts. Most of the studies were recently published in 2021 and 2022. Seven different frailty measures were evaluated. The following frailty measures were used: Canadian Study for Health and Ageing (CSHA) Clinical Frailty score (CFS), Modified frailty index-11 (mFI-11), Hospital frailty index, FRAIL scale, Emergency General Surgery Frailty Index (EGSFI), and Burn frailty index (BFI). There was only one report regarding a specific frailty index designed for the burn population (BFI). Except for one study (which used mFI-11), all included studies have shown a significant effect between assessing frailty and predicting worse outcomes. The CFS was an independent predictor of mortality among the burn population with high certainty of evidence. We found a significant association for other frailty indices as a predictor of mortality, however, the certainty of evidence regarding those was not high. Eight studies found a positive association between assessing frailty and unfavorable discharge location. There was no association between frailty and increased length of stay.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the postadmission assessment of frailty can be a reliable tool for predicting unfavorable outcomes and mortalities among patients with burn injuries. In addition, future studies with various populations from other countries are required to evaluate the efficacy of frailty indices measurement in order to strengthen the available evidence.

Modified Frailty Index is an Independent Predictor of Death in the Burn Population: A Secondary Analysis of the Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation (TRIBE) Study

Frailty can increase the risk of dying after suffering a severe injury. The Modified Frailty Index (MFI) was developed by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to determine the impact of frailty on outcomes. Our aim was to correlate frailty with survival following a burn injury using the 11-item and 5-item MFI. We performed a secondary analysis of the Transfusion Requirement in Burn Care Evaluation (TRIBE) study. Data including, age, gender, medical history, extent and severity of burn injury, inhalation injury and discharge disposition was collected from the TRIBE database. The 11-item MFI (MFI-11) and 5-item MFI (MFI-5) scores were calculated for all patients in the TRIBE database. The TRIBE database included 347 patients. The mean age of subjects was 43 ± 17 years. Mean total body surface area burn (TBSA) was 38 ± 18%, and 23% had inhalation injury. Multivariate logistic regression analysis determined that both MFI-5 (OR 1.86; 95% CI: 1.11-3.11; P-value .02) and MFI-11 (OR 1.83; 95% CI: 1.18-2.8; P-value .007) were independent predictors for mortality. Additionally, MFI-11 scores that are >1 were independently associated with a markedly increased risk of dying after a burn injury (OR 2.91; 95% CI: 1.1-7.7; P-value .03). The MFI can be used to identify vulnerable burn injured patients who are at high risk of dying.

Frailty as a predictor of negative outcomes in trauma patients with rib fractures

BACKGROUND

In patients with rib fractures, adverse outcomes are associated with number of rib fractures; however, studies suggest an association with frailty. We assessed whether frailty, measured using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging clinical frailty scale, was associated with adverse outcomes in this population.

METHODS

Patients ≥50 years admitted for rib fractures from July 2015 to June 2020 were retrospectively scored for frailty. Demographics, comorbidities, injury information, hospital course, and complications were collected. Univariate analyses were performed to assess significant differences between the fit, prefrail, and frail groups. The association between number of rib fractures and frailty with outcomes was determined.

RESULTS

Controlling for age, sex, Injury Severity Score, preadmission anticoagulant, injury mechanism, and comorbidities and nonchest Abbreviated Injury Scores showing significant differences, the number of rib fractures was associated with developing pneumonia (odds ratio = 1.197 [1.076-1.332]; P = .001), hospital length of stay (odds ratio = 1.066 [1.033-1.100], P < .001), mortality (odds ratio = 1.157 [1.048-1.278], P = .004), and discharge to long-term acute care facilities (odds ratio = 1.295 [1.084-1.546], P = .004). Frailty was associated with hospital length of stay (odds ratio = 1.659 [1.059-2.598], P = .027) and discharge to skilled nursing facilities (odds ratio = 5.282 [1.567-17.802], P = .007).

CONCLUSION

In our population, the number of rib fractures was associated with respiratory complications and mortality. Frailty was associated with longer hospitalization and discharge to higher level of care.

Short-term and long-term increased mortality in elderly patients with burn injury: a national longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND

The population of elderly patients with burn injuries is growing. Insight into long-term mortality rates of elderly after burn injury and predictors affecting outcome is limited. This study aimed to provide this information.

METHODS

A multicentre observational retrospective cohort study was conducted in all three Dutch burn centres. Patients aged ≥65 years, admitted with burn injuries between 2009 and 2018, were included. Data were retrieved from electronic patient records and the Dutch Burn Repository R3. Mortality rates and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess predictors for in-hospital mortality and mortality after discharge at 1 year and five-year. Survival analysis was used to assess predictors of five-year mortality.

RESULTS

In total, 682/771 admitted patients were discharged. One-year and five-year mortality rates were 8.1 and 23.4%. The SMRs were 1.9(95%CI 1.5-2.5) and 1.4(95%CI 1.2-1.6), respectively. The SMRs were highest in patients aged 75-80 years at 1 year (SMRs 2.7, 95%CI 1.82-3.87) and five-year in patients aged 65-74 years (SMRs 10.1, 95%CI 7.7-13.0). Independent predictors for mortality at 1 year after discharge were higher age (OR 1.1, 95%CI 1.0-1.1), severe comorbidity, (ASA-score ≥ 3) (OR 4.8, 95%CI 2.3-9.7), and a non-home discharge location (OR 2.0, 95%CI 1.1-3.8). The relative risk of dying up to five-year was increased by age (HR 1.1, 95%CI 1.0-1.1), severe comorbidity (HR 2.3, 95%CI 1.6-3.5), and non-home discharge location (HR 2.1, 95%CI 1.4-3.2).

CONCLUSION

Long-term mortality until five-year after burn injury was higher than the age and sex-matched general Dutch population, and predicted by higher age, severe comorbidity, and a non-home discharge destination. Next to pre-injury characteristics, potential long-lasting systemic consequences on biological mechanisms following burn injuries probably play a role in increased mortality. Decreased health status makes patients more prone to burn injuries, leading to early death.

Admission Frailty Score Are Associated With Increased Risk of Acute Respiratory Failure and Mortality in Burn Patients 50 and Older

Herein, we assessed the utility of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CSHA-CFS) to predict burn-specific outcomes. We hypothesized that frail patients are at greater risk for burn-related complications and require increased healthcare support at discharge. Patients 50 years and older admitted to our institution for burn injuries between July 2009 and June 2019 were included. Demographics, comorbidities, pre-injury functional status, injury and hospitalization information, complications (graft loss, acute respiratory failure, and acute kidney disease [AKI]), mortality, and discharge disposition were collected. Multivariate analyses were performed to assess the association between admission frailty scored using the CSHA-CFS and outcomes. P < .05 was considered significant. Eight-hundred fifty-one patients were included, 697 were not frail and 154 were frail. Controlling for Baux scores, sex, race, mechanism of injury, 2nd and 3rd degree burn surface, and inhalation injury, frailty was associated with acute respiratory failure (OR = 2.599 [1.460-4.628], P = .001) and with mortality (OR = 6.080 [2.316-15.958]; P < .001). Frailty was also associated with discharge to skilled nursing facility, rehabilitation, or long-term acute care facilities (OR = 3.135 [1.784-5.508], P < .001), and to hospice (OR = 8.694 [1.646-45.938], P = .011) when compared to home without healthcare services. Frailty is associated with increased risk of acute respiratory failure, mortality, and requiring increased healthcare support post-discharge. Our data suggest that frailty can be used as a tool to predict morbidity and mortality and for goals of care discussions for the burn patient.

A Comprehensive, Retrospective Analysis of Variables for Potential Mortality Impact in Patients With Thermal or Inhalation Injury

Age, percentage TBSA burned, and the presence of inhalation injury have been used historically in the prediction of mortality in thermally injured patients despite other factors being also associated with mortality. Recent literature has identified novel factors associated with increased length of stay (LOS) and may provide a better prediction model for mortality in burn patients. The study objective was to perform a subset analysis of a multitude of known and novel variables for potential association with mortality. Demographics and injury characteristics along with during stay variables were collected and analyzed. This study is a re-analysis of a retrospective study examining variables associated with increased LOS. Of the 629 patients screened, 396 were included in the analysis. After univariable analysis, 35 variables had significant associations with mortality, including age, house fire, acute kidney injury, heart failure, inhalation injury, and history of diabetes. After multivariable analysis, the best performing model included heart failure, acute kidney injury, admission Glasgow Coma Scale score, and revised Baux score. Quantile analysis of age revealed greater than 60 years was most predictive of mortality. The best multivariable model for patients greater than 60 years old included heart failure, vasopressor use, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and TBSA burned. Considering only variables present on admission, the best multivariable model for patients greater than 60 years old included heart failure, % TBSA burned, and inhalation injury. The addition of variables into current prediction models and databases may be warranted.

Proceedings of the 2021 American Burn Association State and Future of Burn Science Meeting

Periodically, the American Burn Association (ABA) has convened a State of the Science meeting on various topics representing multiple disciplines within burn care and research. In 2021 at the request of the ABA President, meeting development was guided by the ABA's Burn Science Advisory Panel (BSAP) and a subgroup of meeting chairs. The goal of the meeting was to produce both an evaluation of the current literature and ongoing studies, and to produce a research agenda and/or define subject matter-relevant next steps to advance the field(s). Members of the BSAP defined the topics to be addressed and subsequently solicited for nominations of expert speakers and topic leaders from the ABA's Research Committee. Current background literature for each topic was compiled by the meeting chairs and the library then enhanced by the invited topic and breakout discussion leaders. The meeting was held in New Orleans, LA on November 2nd and 3rd and was formatted to allow for 12 different topics, each with two subtopics, to be addressed. Topic leaders provided a brief overview of each topic to approximately 100 attendees, followed by expert-lead breakout sessions for each topic that allowed for focused discussion among subject matter experts and interested participants. The breakout and topic group leaders worked with the participants to determine research needs and associated next steps including white papers, reviews and in some cases collaborative grant proposals. Here, summaries from each topic area will be presented to highlight the main foci of discussion and associated conclusions.

Frailty in mid-life predicts outcome following trauma

PURPOSE

Midlife adults (50-64 y) are at risk for falls and subsequent injury; yet current guidance on fall screening only pertains to older adults (> 65 y). Herein, we evaluated whether frailty was predictive of readmission for falls in midlife trauma patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of trauma midlife patients admitted for traumatic injuries from 2010 to 2015. Demographics, injury data, fall history, and post-index readmission for falls were collected from medical records. Frailty scores were calculated retrospectively using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CSHA-CFS). The association between frailty and outcomes was assessed. p < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 326 midlife patients were included, 54% were considered fit, 33.7% pre-frail, and 12.3% frail. Compared to their fit and pre-frail counterparts, frail patients were more likely to be female (67.5% vs. 46.3% vs. 36.3%, p < 0.001), have a history of fall (22.5% vs. 15.5% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.001), and to have suffered a ground level fall on index admission (52.5% vs. 20% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001). Controlling for age, BMI, gender, race, and fall history, frailty was associated with readmission of midlife adults for falls (OR = 1.82 [1.23-2.69]; p = 0.003) and discharge to skilled nursing facilities (OR = 26.86 [8.03-89.81], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-injury frailty may be an effective tool to predict risk of readmission for fall and discharge disposition in midlife trauma patients.

Prognostic Factors for In-Hospital Mortality of Geriatric Burns From the US National Inpatient Sample 2016 to 2018

Older adults with an acute burn experience a high frequency of in-hospital mortality. However, traditional burn mortality prediction models are less accurate for older adults likely because they do not account for geriatric specific factors, such as frailty. This study aims to investigate the impact of frailty on in-hospital mortality in older adult burn patients. Patients ≥50 years of age with an acute burn diagnosis in the National Inpatient Sample (2016-2018) were included in the cohort. Three multivariable logistic regression models to predict in-hospital mortality were generated and compared. The models were 1) age and percent total body surface area, 2) age, percent total body surface area and the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and 3) age, percent total body surface area, and Hospital Frailty Risk Score. A total of 60,515 weighted discharges were included in the cohort. In-hospital mortality increased with age, as 3.3% of 50- to 64-year-olds, 5.3% of 65- to 74-year-olds, 6.6% of 75- to 84-year-olds, and 9.9% of ≥85-year-olds died during the acute burn admission (P < .001). The multivariable model that included Hospital Frailty Risk Score had a higher area under the receiver operating characteristics curve than the model with age and percent total body surface area (0.84 vs 0.79; P < .001) and the model with Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (0.84 vs 0.83; P = .013). Frailty improved prediction of in-hospital mortality for older adult acute burn patients and burn specialists should consider implementing a frailty instrument to evaluate older adults with an acute burn injury.

The feasibility and reliability of frailty assessment tools applicable in acute in-hospital trauma patients: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Assessing frailty in patients with an acute trauma can be challenging. To provide trustworthy results, tools should be feasible and reliable. This systematic review evaluated existing evidence on the feasibility and reliability of frailty assessment tools applied in acute in-hospital trauma patients.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in relevant databases until February 2020. Studies evaluating the feasibility and/or reliability of a multidimensional frailty assessment tool used to identify frail trauma patients were identified. The feasibility and reliability results and the risk of bias of included studies were assessed. This study was conducted and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and registered in Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42020175003).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies evaluating 12 frailty assessment tools were included. The risk of bias of the included studies was fair to good. The most frequently evaluated tool was the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) (n = 5). All studies evaluated feasibility in terms of the percentage of patients for whom frailty could be assessed; feasibility was high (median, 97%; range, 49-100%). Other feasibility aspects, including time needed for completion, tool availability and costs, availability of instructions, and necessity of training for users, were hardly reported. Reliability was only assessed in three studies, all evaluating the CFS. The interrater reliability varied between 42% and >90% agreement, with a Krippendorff α of 0.27 to 0.41.

CONCLUSION

Feasibility of most instruments was generally high. Other aspects were hardly reported. Reliability was only evaluated for the CFS with results varying from poor to good. The reliability of frailty assessment tools for acute trauma patients needs further critical evaluation to conclude whether assessment leads to trustworthy results that are useful in clinical practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, Level II.

Age and Injury Size Influence the Magnitude of Fecal Dysbiosis in Adult Burn Patients

Clinical studies have demonstrated that age 50 years or older is an independent risk factor associated with poor prognosis after burn injury, the second leading cause of traumatic injuries in the aged population. While mechanisms driving age-dependent postburn mortality are perplexing, changes in the intestinal microbiome, may contribute to the heightened, dysregulated systemic response seen in aging burn patients. The fecal microbiome from 22 patients admitted to a verified burn center from July 2018 to February 2019 was stratified based on the age of 50 years and total burn surface area (TBSA) size of ≥10%. Significant differences (P = .014) in overall microbiota community composition (ie, beta diversity) were measured across the four patient groups: young <10% TBSA, young ≥10% TBSA, older <10% TBSA, and older ≥10% TBSA. Differences in beta diversity were driven by %TBSA (P = .013) and trended with age (P = .087). Alpha diversity components, richness, evenness, and Shannon diversity were measured. We observed significant differences in bacterial species evenness (P = .0023) and Shannon diversity (P = .0033) between the groups. There were significant correlations between individual bacterial species and levels of short-chain fatty acids. Specifically, levels of fecal butyrate correlated with the presence of Enterobacteriaceae, an opportunistic gut pathogen, when elevated in burn patients lead to worsen outcomes. Overall, our findings reveal that age-specific changes in the fecal microbiome following burn injuries may contribute to immune system dysregulation in patients with varying TBSA burns and potentially lead to worsened clinical outcomes with heightened morbidity and mortality.

Higher Admission Frailty Scores Predict Increased Mortality, Morbidity, and Healthcare Utilization in the Elderly Burn Population

The Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale is a validated rapid assessment of frailty phenotype and predictor of mortality in the geriatric population. Using data from a large tertiary care burn center, we assessed the association between admission frailty in an elderly burn population and inpatient outcomes. This was a retrospective analysis of burn patients ≥ 65 years from 2015-2019. Patients were assigned to frailty subgroups based on comprehensive medical, social work, and therapy assessments. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate associations between admission frailty and 30-day inpatient mortality. Our study included 644 patients (low frailty: 262, moderate frailty: 345, and high frailty: 37). Frailty was associated with higher median TBSA and age at admission. The 30-day cumulative incidence of mortality was 2.3%, 7.0%, and 24.3% among the low, moderate, and high frailty strata, respectively. After adjustment for age, TBSA, and inhalation injury, high frailty was associated with increased 30-day mortality, compared to low (HR 5.73; 95% CI 1.86, 17.62). Moderate frailty also appeared to increase 30-day mortality, although estimates were imprecise (HR 2.19; 95% CI 0.87-5.50). High frailty was associated with increased morbidity and healthcare utilization, including need for intensive care stay (68% vs 37% and 21%, p<0.001) and rehab or care facility at discharge (41% vs 25% and 6%, p<0.001), compared to moderate and low frailty subgroups. Our findings emphasize the need to consider pre-injury physiological state and the increased risk of death and morbidity in the elderly burn population.

No Difference in Morbidity or Mortality Between Octogenarians and Other Geriatric Burn Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

Geriatric burn trauma patients (age ≥65 years) have a 5-fold higher mortality rate than younger adults. With the population of the US aging, the number of elderly burn and trauma patients is expected to increase. A past study using the National Burn Repository revealed a linear increase in mortality for those >65 years old. We hypothesized that octogenarians with burn and trauma injuries would have a higher rate of in-hospital complications and mortality, than patients aged 65-79 years old.

METHODS

The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2010-2016) was queried for burn trauma patients. To detect mortality risk a multivariable logistic regression model was used.

RESULTS

From 282 patients, there were 73 (25.9%) octogenarians and 209 (74.1%) aged 65-79 years old. The two cohorts had similar median injury severity scores (16 vs. 15 in octogenarians, P = .81), total body surface area burned (P = .30), and comorbidities apart from an increased smoking (12.9% vs. 4.1%, P = .04) and decreased hypertension (52.2% vs. 65.8%, P = .04) in the younger cohort. Octogenarians had similar complications, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis (P > .05), and mortality (15.1% vs. 10.5%, P = .30), compared to the younger cohort. Octogenarians were not associated with an increased mortality risk (odds ratio 1.51, confidence interval 0.24-9.56, P = .67).

DISCUSSION

Among burn trauma patients ≥65 years, age should not be a sole predictor for mortality risk. Continued research is necessary in order to determine more accurate approaches to prognosticate mortality in geriatric burn trauma patients, such as the validation and refinement of a burn-trauma-related frailty index.

Sepsis Definitions in Burns

Background: Sepsis is the leading cause of death in burns. Despite its importance, sepsis lacks a proper definition. An established definition will lead to early and accurate diagnosis, prompt treatment, and a reduced mortality rate. The aim of this work is to discuss current definitions and to look ahead at novel definitions with clinical implications. Method: A review of the current understanding of sepsis definitions in burns. Results: Adaptation of sepsis definitions in the general population and specific burn definitions have gotten better but still need improvements and, potentially, incorporation of molecular, laboratory, patient-specific, and clinical factors. This work includes the history, evolution, and predictive value of current definitions of sepsis in burns. A review of current and future markers of sepsis and potentially useful definitions are presented. Conclusions: Sepsis definitions have evolved over the last decades and will continue to do so. We believe the best definition in burn patients is the Sepsis-3 that was developed originally for critically ill patients. However, there are several studies investigating more specific definitions with better sensitivity and specificity.

Association between frailty and chronic pain among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Frailty and chronic pain are prevalent among older adults. However, no study has systematically reviewed the association between frailty and chronic pain in older adults. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of frailty and prefrailty among older adults with chronic pain and review the longitudinal association between frailty status and chronic pain.

METHODS

Embase, Medline, Pubmed, and Cochrane library were searched from inception to March 2020. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Random effect models and Mantel-Haenszel weighting were adopted to synthesize the estimates.

RESULTS

Among the initial 846 articles retrieved, 24 were included in the review (12 cross-sectional, and 12 longitudinal). The pooled prevalence in persons with chronic pain was 18% (95% CI 14-23%; I² = 98.7%) for frailty and 43% (95% CI 36-51%; I² = 98.2%) for prefrailty. The pooled prevalence of chronic pain was 50% (95% CI 45-55%; I² = 88.3%) for individuals with frailty and 37% (95% CI 31-42%; I² = 97.1%) for individuals with prefrailty. Persons with chronic pain were 1.85 (95% CI 1.49-2.28; I² = 93.2%) times more likely to develop frailty after an average follow-up of 5.8 years compared to those without.

CONCLUSION

Frailty and prefrailty are common in persons with chronic pain. Chronic pain among non-frail older persons significantly predicts the incidence of frailty after an average follow-up of 5.8 years. Future studies should explore the efficacy of different pain management strategies in reducing physical frailty and clarify the association of other types of frailty (cognitive, social and psychological) with chronic pain.

Predictors of Need for First and Recurrent Emergency Medical Service Transport to Emergency Department after Dialysis Initiation

Background: Dialysis patients are frequently transported to the emergency department (ED) by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) due to acute and severe illness. However, little is known about predictors of first and recurrent transport to the ED (EMS-ED), based on characteristics at the time of dialysis initiation.Methods: We analyzed a cohort of adult (≥18 years) patients affiliated with a large quaternary care center who initiated chronic dialysis from 2009 to 2013 (last follow-up: 2015). Data on patient characteristics at the time of dialysis initiation were linked to regional EMS data. Candidate predictors of first and recurrent EMS-ED transport included comorbid conditions, dialysis characteristics and frailty severity (using the first version of the clinical frailty scale score; CFS). Time to first EMS-ED was analyzed using a multivariable sub-hazards regression model accounting for competing events (transplantation or death). Time to recurrent EMS-ED was analyzed using the Anderson-Gill counting approach, accounting for competing risks.Results: A total of 455 patients were included in the study, 243 (53%) had 1+ EMS-ED events, 90 (20%) never required an EMS-ED at last follow-up, and 69 (15%) and 53 (12%) experienced transplant or death as their first event, respectively. The mean age of the cohort was 62 ± 15 years, 89% were Caucasian, and 35% were female sex. Patients were highly comorbid and 97/381 (25.5%) with available data on frailty severity had a CFS score of ≥5, inclusive of CFS scores ranging from mildly to severely frail. After adjustment, a CFS score of ≥5 (relative to 1-2) was associated with a > 2-fold increase in the risk of first EMS-ED (subdistribution relative hazard; SHR 2.28, 95% confidence interval; CI 1.30-3.98). A history of peripheral vascular disease (SHR 1.43, 95% CI 1.00-2.03) and rheumatologic disease (SHR 1.84, 95% CI 1.00-3.38) was also associated with first EMS-ED. Frailty severity was the only factor associated with recurrent EMS-ED.Conclusion: Patients are at a high risk of EMS-ED after dialysis initiation. Frailty severity (at the time of dialysis initiation) is a strong predictor of first and recurrent EMS-ED and this may be important to guide informed decision making and resource planning for dialysis patients who require EMS.

Timing and methods of frailty assessments in geriatric trauma patients: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The trauma population is aging and better prognostic measures for geriatric trauma patients are required. Frailty rather than age appears to be associated with poor outcomes. This systematic review aimed to identify the optimum frailty assessment instrument and timing of assessment in patients aged over 65 years admitted to hospital after traumatic injury. The secondary aim was to evaluate outcomes associated with frailty in elderly trauma populations.

METHODS

This systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018090620). A MEDLINE and EMBASE literature search was conducted from inception to June 2019 combining the concepts of injury, geriatric, frailty, assessment and prognosis. Included studies were in patients 65 years or older hospitalised after injury and exposed to an instrument meeting consensus definition for frailty assessment. Study quality was assessed using criteria for review of prognostic studies combined with a GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight papers met inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight frailty or component instruments were reported, and assessments of pre-injury frailty were made up to 1-year post injury. Pre-injury frailty prevalence varied from 13% (13/100) to 94% (17/18), with in-hospital mortality rates from 2% (5/250) to 33% (6/18). Eleven studies found an association between frailty and mortality. Eleven studies reported an association between frailty and a composite outcome of mortality and adverse discharge destination. Generalisability and assessment of strength of associations was limited by single centre studies with inconsistent findings and overlapping cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Associations between frailty and adverse outcomes including mortality in geriatric trauma patients were demonstrated despite a range of frailty instruments, administering clinicians, time of assessment and data sources. Although evidence gaps remain, incorporating frailty assessment into trauma systems is likely to identify geriatric patients at risk of adverse outcomes. Consistency in frailty instruments and long-term geriatric specific outcome measures will improve research relevance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III prognostic.

Association of Clinical Frailty Scores With Hospital Readmission for Falls After Index Admission for Trauma-Related Injury

IMPORTANCE

Falls have been associated with morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. Assessment of frailty at hospital admission may help health care professionals evaluate fall risk in patients with trauma-related injury.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether frailty assessed using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale is associated with readmission for falls after index admission for trauma-related injury in patients aged 50 years and older.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records of 804 patients aged 50 years and older with trauma-related injury who were admitted to the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics between July 1, 2010, and June 30, 2015. Records were reviewed from May 30 to August 1, 2017, and patient demographics, admission data, injury severity scores, history of falls, and postindex readmission data for ground-level falls were recorded. Frailty scores were calculated using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale. Patients with a score of 5 or higher were classified as frail.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Frailty assessed using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale and readmission for falls after index admission for trauma-related injury.

RESULTS

A total of 804 patients with trauma-related injury were included in the study. The mean (SD) age was 70 (13.4) years; 744 patients (93.4%) were white, and 380 (47.3%) were men. Among the total population, the mortality rate was 3.7%; 255 patients (31.7%) were classified as frail and 549 (68.3%) as nonfrail. The mean (SD) injury severity score was 9.8 (7.9), and the score was similar between frail and nonfrail patients. Of 255 frail patients, 179 (70.2%) were women, and frail patients were significantly older than nonfrail patients (mean [SD], 79.2 [12.1] years vs 66.2 [11.9] years, respectively; P < .001). The percentages of frail patients presenting to the hospital with a history of falls and readmitted for falls after index admission were higher than those of nonfrail patients (63 [24.8%] vs 53 [9.6%] and 55 [21.6%] vs 58 [10.6%], respectively; both P < .001). Frailty was associated with discharge to the home with health care (odds ratio [OR], 4.82; 95% CI, 2.10-11.01; P < .001), to a skilled nursing facility (OR, 5.47; 95% CI, 3.40-8.80; P < .001), and to a hospice care facility (OR, 8.47; 95% CI, 2.09-34.42; P = .003) compared with discharge to the home with self-care. Frailty was also associated with readmission for falls after index admission (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.39-3.66; P = .001) and the number of falls within 1 year after index admission (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.67; P = .02) compared with nonfrailty. The frailty analysis was controlled for age, body mass index, sex, and falls at index admission.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Measurement of frailty at hospital admission may be an effective tool to assess fall risk and discharge disposition among patients with trauma-related injury aged 50 years and older.