Elsa Dent1, Ian Chapman2, Stuart Howell3, Cynthia Piantadosi1, Renuka Visvanathan4. 1. Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 2. Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 3. Discipline of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 4. Discipline of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia Aged and Extended Care Services, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: admission to a Geriatric Evaluation and Management Unit (GEMU) can optimise a patient's chance of functional recovery. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the ability of several commonly used frailty and functional decline indices to predict GEMU outcomes, both at discharge and at 6 months. DESIGN: prospective, observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: consecutive GEMU patients aged ≥70 years. METHODS: patients were classified as 'frail' or 'at high risk of functional decline' using several frailty and functional decline instruments. Predictive ability was evaulated using logistic regression and area under receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves (auROC). RESULTS: a total of 172 patients were included. Frailty prevalence varied from 24 to 94% depending on the instrument used. Several instruments predicted patients at risk of poor outcome, including the Frailty Index of Accumulative Deficits (FI-CD), Fried's Cardiovascular Health Study index, the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures index, an adapted Katz score of activities of daily living (ADL), Instrumental ADL, the Score Hospitalier d'Evaluation du Risque de Perte d'Autonomie (SHERPA) and grip strength [odds ratio (OR) range of 2.06-6.47]. Adequate discriminatory power for discharge outcome was achieved by the FI-CD (auROC = 0.735, P < 0.001) and an adapted Katz score (auROC = 0.704, P = < 0.001). The FI-CD also showed adequate discriminatory power for a poor 6-month outcome (auROC = 0.702, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: frailty and functional decline instruments can predict older patients at risk of poor outcome. However, only the FI-CD showed adequate discriminatory power for outcome prediction at both follow-up time-points.
BACKGROUND: admission to a Geriatric Evaluation and Management Unit (GEMU) can optimise a patient's chance of functional recovery. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the ability of several commonly used frailty and functional decline indices to predict GEMU outcomes, both at discharge and at 6 months. DESIGN: prospective, observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: consecutive GEMU patients aged ≥70 years. METHODS:patients were classified as 'frail' or 'at high risk of functional decline' using several frailty and functional decline instruments. Predictive ability was evaulated using logistic regression and area under receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves (auROC). RESULTS: a total of 172 patients were included. Frailty prevalence varied from 24 to 94% depending on the instrument used. Several instruments predicted patients at risk of poor outcome, including the Frailty Index of Accumulative Deficits (FI-CD), Fried's Cardiovascular Health Study index, the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures index, an adapted Katz score of activities of daily living (ADL), Instrumental ADL, the Score Hospitalier d'Evaluation du Risque de Perte d'Autonomie (SHERPA) and grip strength [odds ratio (OR) range of 2.06-6.47]. Adequate discriminatory power for discharge outcome was achieved by the FI-CD (auROC = 0.735, P < 0.001) and an adapted Katz score (auROC = 0.704, P = < 0.001). The FI-CD also showed adequate discriminatory power for a poor 6-month outcome (auROC = 0.702, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: frailty and functional decline instruments can predict older patients at risk of poor outcome. However, only the FI-CD showed adequate discriminatory power for outcome prediction at both follow-up time-points.
Authors: Deborah A Lekan; Debra C Wallace; Thomas P McCoy; Jie Hu; Susan G Silva; Heather E Whitson Journal: Biol Res Nurs Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 2.522
Authors: Rosemary Saunders; Kate Crookes; Karla Seaman; Seng Giap Marcus Ang; Caroline Bulsara; Max K Bulsara; Beverley Ewens; Olivia Gallagher; Renee M Graham; Karen Gullick; Sue Haydon; Jeff Hughes; Mustafa Atee; Kim-Huong Nguyen; Bev O'Connell; Debra Scaini; Christopher Etherton-Beer Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-20 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Ruth E Hubbard; Nancye M Peel; Mayukh Samanta; Leonard C Gray; Brant E Fries; Arnold Mitnitski; Kenneth Rockwood Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2015-03-18 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Rónán O'Caoimh; Yang Gao; Anton Svendrovski; Elizabeth Healy; Elizabeth O'Connell; Gabrielle O'Keeffe; Una Cronin; Estera Igras; Eileen O'Herlihy; Carol Fitzgerald; Elizabeth Weathers; Patricia Leahy-Warren; Nicola Cornally; D William Molloy Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 3.921