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

Comparing How Three Frailty Scales Predict Negative Outcomes in Trauma Patients With Rib Fractures

INTRODUCTION

Frailty is a risk factor for adverse outcomes after injury. Herein, we compared three frailty scales: the Canadian Study of Health and Aging clinical frailty scale, the rib fracture frailty index (RFFI) and the modified frailty index-5, to assess which scale is most applicable in predicting risk for negative outcomes in older patients with rib fractures.

METHODS

Patients ≥65 admitted for rib fractures were retrospectively scored for frailty using the RFFI, Canadian Study of Health and Aging clinical frailty scale, and modified frailty index-5. Outcomes examined were in-hospital mortality, pneumonia, in-hospital intubation, hospital length of stay, and discharge to skilled nursing facilities. Areas under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value were determined for each frailty scale with each outcome. Agreement was determined using Fleiss' Kappa. P <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-one patients were included. All three scales demonstrated similar predictive abilities for the measured outcomes. RFFI predicted mortality and pneumonia 70% of the time. All three scales predicted discharge to skilled nursing facilities 60% of the time. The concordance for all three frailty scales was 241/341 (70.7%). Fleiss Kappa was 0.40 [0.34-0.46] (P < 0.001), indicating a fair to moderate agreement. The predictive ability of all three scales was higher in patients 65-74 y old than in patients ≥75.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, no scale appeared to significantly outperform the others by areas under the curve estimation. Interrater reliability was higher in the 65 to 74-y-old population compared to the 75 and older population.

Utility of Frailty Index in Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Patients With the Same American Society of Anesthesiologists Class in Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the utility of the five-item Modified Frailty Index (MFI-5) as a preoperative risk-stratification tool in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for patients with the same American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from 2008 to 2021.

SETTING

The NSQIP includes 685 participating hospitals in all 50 states, the majority being large, academic medical centers.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients undergoing VATS were identified via CPT codes in the deidentified NSQIP dataset. Patients with invalid values for any variables of interest or significant covariates were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

No interventions were applied to any patients in this retrospective cohort study.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

69,145 patients undergoing VATS were included, with the largest number having single lobectomy (32%) or unilateral wedge resection (26%). A total of 1,277 (1.8%) had unplanned reintubation, and 1,155 (1.7%) had ventilator dependence (VentDep) >48 hours after surgery. Of these patients, 66% were ASA class 3. Overall, ASA classification had a stronger correlation with both VentDep rates (adjusted R2 difference: +6.1%) and reintubation rates (adjusted R2 difference: +1.5%) than the MFI-5 score. However, combining ASA class with MFI-5 score was a stronger predictor for both primary outcomes than the ASA class alone (adjusted R2 difference: +1.5%, p < 0.001). The MFI-5 had the strongest correlation with both outcomes among ASA class 3 patients, demonstrating exponentially increasing odds of VentDep and reintubation (MFI 3 v MFI 0: odds ratio = 5.1 [3.7, 7], p = 0.002). MFI-5 also helped classify risk within ASA class 2 patients but not as reliably as for ASA class 3 (ASA class 2 reintubation: increased probability from MFI 0-1 and 1-2; VentDep: increased probability from MFI 0-1 only, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The MFI-5 is a comorbidity-based scale that can be calculated preoperatively and considers distinct, but complementary information to the ASA class. Among VATS patients with identical ASA classes 2 and 3, the MFI-5 further stratified risk for reintubation and ventilator dependence >48 hours postsurgery.

Validation of the Korean Version of the Clinical Frailty Scale-Adjusted Korean Triage and Acuity Scale for Older Patients in the Emergency Department

Background and Objectives: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), used to screen for prehospital frailty in patients aged >65 years, is simple, time-efficient, and has been validated in emergency departments (EDs). In this study, we analyzed whether the Korean Triage and Acuity Scale (KTAS) classification by level in older patients determined to have frailty based on the Korean version of the CFS increases the triage performance of the current KTAS. Materials and Methods: The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. This study retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data from three ED centers. Patients with a CFS score ranging from five (mildly frail) to nine (terminally ill) were categorized into the frailty group. We upgraded the KTAS classification of the frailty group by one level of urgency and defined this as the CFS-KTAS. Results: The cutoff values for predicting admission were three and two for the KTAS and CFS-KTAS, respectively. A significant difference was observed in the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve between the KTAS and CFS-KTAS. To predict ICU admission, the cutoff score was two for both scales. A significant difference was observed in the AUROC curve between the KTAS and CFS-KTAS. For predicting in-hospital mortality, the cutoff score was two for both scales. A significant difference was observed in the AUROC curve between the KTAS and CFS-KTAS. Conclusions: This study showed that the CFS-adjusted KTAS has a more useful prognostic value than the KTAS alone for predicting hospital outcomes in older 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.

A systematic review of predictive accuracy via c-statistic of preoperative frailty tests for extended length of stay, post-operative complications, and mortality

Frailty, as an age-related syndrome of reduced physiological reserve, contributes significantly to post-operative outcomes. With the aging population, frailty poses a significant threat to patients and health systems. Since 2012, preoperative frailty assessment has been recommended, yet its implementation has been inhibited by the vast number of frailty tests and lack of consensus. Since the anesthesiologist is the best placed for perioperative care, an anesthesia-tailored preoperative frailty test must be simple, quick, universally applicable to all surgeries, accurate, and ideally available in an app or online form. This systematic review attempted to rank frailty tests by predictive accuracy using the c-statistic in the outcomes of extended length of stay, 3-month post-operative complications, and 3-month mortality, as well as feasibility outcomes including time to completion, equipment and training requirements, cost, and database compatibility. Presenting findings of all frailty tests as a future reference for anesthesiologists, Clinical Frailty Scale was found to have the best combination of accuracy and feasibility for mortality with speed of completion and phone app availability; Edmonton Frailty Scale had the best accuracy for post-operative complications with opportunity for self-reporting. Finally, extended length of stay had too little data for recommendation of a frailty test. This review also demonstrated the need for changing research emphasis from odds ratios to metrics that measure the accuracy of a test itself, such as the c-statistic.

Long-term health-related quality of life and independence among older survivors of serious injury

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the recovery experiences of older trauma intensive care unit (TICU) survivors and the relationship between geriatric trauma care and long-term functional ability and health-related quality of life (HRQOL).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of 218 patients (age, ≥65 years) admitted to a Level 1 regional trauma center TICU before versus after implementation of a geriatric care bundle with protocolized geriatrics consultations (Geri-T). Survivors or their proxies were interviewed approximately 1 year after hospitalization. Outcomes included the Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADLs), and EQ-5D-5L HRQOL survey. Two investigator-developed questions regarding recovery experiences were included. Differences in outcomes among survivors admitted before versus after Geri-T were analyzed using multivariable linear regression. Responses to questions about recovery experiences were qualitatively assessed using content analysis.

RESULTS

We reached 67% (146/218) of hospital survivors or their proxies across both groups; 126 patients were still alive and completed the survey. Mean age was 76 (SD, 8), 36% were female, and 90% were independent with ADLs preinjury. At follow-up, independence with ADLs was 76% and IADLs was 63%. The mean EQ-5D-5L index score was 0.78 (SD, 0.18). Most patients (65%) reported having not returned to preinjury functional status. Neither functional ability or HRQOL differed significantly among patients admitted before versus after Geri-T. Content analysis of open-ended questions revealed themes of activity limitations, persistent pain, and cognitive dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Nearly one-fifth of TICU survivors experienced loss of ADL function 1 year after injury, and most reported having not returned to preinjury functional status. Nonetheless, patient-reported HRQOL was comparable to age-adjusted norms. Geri-T was not associated with differences in HRQOL or functional ability. Survivors reported persistent difficulty with activities beyond those of daily living, pain, and cognition.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiologic, Level III.

Geriatric Trauma and Frailty

Geriatric trauma is increasing in the United States. The care of patients with geriatric trauma is complex due to age-related changes and comorbidities. Patients with geriatric trauma have increased risk of poor outcomes compared with younger patients with trauma, and the highest risk groups are those who have frailty. These patients require special care considerations. Multidisciplinary care can improve outcomes in frail patients with geriatric trauma.

The Association Between the Clinical Frailty Scale and Adverse Health Outcomes in Older Adults in Acute Clinical Settings - A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background

Frail older adults experience higher rates of adverse health outcomes. Therefore, assessing pre-hospital frailty early in the course of care is essential to identify the most vulnerable patients and determine their risk of deterioration. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a frailty assessment tool that evaluates pre-hospital mobility, energy, physical activity, and function to generate a score that ranges from very fit to terminally ill.

Purpose

To synthesize the evidence of the association between the CFS degree and all-cause mortality, all-cause readmission, length of hospital stay, adverse discharge destination, and functional decline in patients >65 years in acute clinical settings.

Design

Systematic review with narrative synthesis.

Methods

Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus) were searched for prospective or retrospective studies reporting a relationship between pre-hospital frailty according to the CFS and the outcomes of interest from database inception to April 2020.

Results

Our search yielded 756 articles, of which 29 studies were included in this review (15 were at moderate risk and 14 at low risk of bias). The included studies represented 26 cohorts from 25 countries (N = 44166) published between 2011 and 2020. All included studies showed that pre-hospital frailty according to the CFS is an independent predictor of all adverse health outcomes included in the review.

Conclusion

A primary purpose of the CFS is to grade clinically increased risk (i.e. risk stratification). Our results report the accumulated knowledge on the risk-predictive performance of the CFS and highlight the importance of routinely including frailty assessments, such as the CFS, to estimate biological age, improve risk assessments, and assist clinical decision-making in older adults in acute care. Further research into the potential of the CFS and whether implementing the CFS in routine practice will improve care and patients' quality of life is warranted.

Frailty Screening Practice in Specialized Burn Care-A Retrospective Multicentre Cohort Study

Background: Frailty can have a negative influence on outcomes in elderly patients after burn injuries. The Dutch hospitals have used a four-domain frailty screening instrument from the Dutch Safety Management System (DSMS) since 2012. However, its feasibility and validity have hardly been studied. We aim to assess the feasibility and validity of frailty screening in specialized burn care. Methods: A multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted in all Dutch burn centres. Patients aged ≥ 70, with a primary admission between 2012-2018, were included. Data were derived from electronic patient files. Results: In total, 515 patients were included. Frailty screening was complete in 39.6% and partially complete in 23.9%. Determinants for a complete screening were admission after 2015 (OR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.42-3.25) and lower percentage TBSA burned (OR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.05-029). In all completely screened patients, 49.9% were at risk of frailty. At risk patients were older, had more comorbidities (known group validity), a longer length of stay, and more frequently a non-home discharge (predictive validity). Conclusion: Frailty screening in specialized burn care is feasible and was conducted in 63.5% of admitted patients. In total, 44% of screened patients were at risk of frailty. Validity of frailty screening was confirmed. Frailty screening can contribute to optimal specialized burn care.