Shawn Tejiram1, Julia Cartwright2, Sandra L Taylor3, Victor H Hatcher4, Colette Galet5, Dionne A Skeete5, Kathleen S Romanowski6. 1. Division of Burn Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California. 2. School of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California. 4. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 5. Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 6. Division of Burn Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California. Electronic address: ksromanowski@ucdavis.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Elderly (65 and older) fall-related injuries are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Although frailty predicts poor outcomes in geriatric trauma, literature comparing frailty scoring systems remains limited. Herein, we evaluated which frailty scoring system best predicts falls over time in the elderly. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Acute surgical patients 65 y and older were enrolled and prospectively observed. Demographics and frailty, assessed using the FRAIL Scale, Trauma Specific Frailty Index (TSFI), and Canadian Frailty Scale (CSHA-CFS), were collected at enrollment and 3 mo intervals following discharge for 1 y. Surveys queried the total number and timing of falls. Changes in frailty over time were assessed by logistic regression and area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled. FRAIL Scale and CSHA-CFS scores did not change over time, but TSFI scores did (P ≤ 0.01). Worsening frailty was observed using TSFI at 6 (P ≤ 0.01) and 12 mo (P ≤ 0.01) relative to baseline. Mortality did not differ based on frailty using any frailty score. Increasing frailty scores and time postdischarge was associated with increased odds of a fall. AUC estimates with 95% CI were 0.72 [0.64, 0.80], 0.81 [0.74, 0.88], and 0.76 [0.68, 0.84] for the FRAIL Scale, TSFI, and CSHA-CFS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of falls postdischarge were associated with increased age, time postdischarge, and frailty in our population. No scale appeared to significantly outperform the other by AUC estimation. Further study on the longitudinal effects of frailty is warranted.
BACKGROUND: Elderly (65 and older) fall-related injuries are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Although frailty predicts poor outcomes in geriatric trauma, literature comparing frailty scoring systems remains limited. Herein, we evaluated which frailty scoring system best predicts falls over time in the elderly. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Acute surgical patients 65 y and older were enrolled and prospectively observed. Demographics and frailty, assessed using the FRAIL Scale, Trauma Specific Frailty Index (TSFI), and Canadian Frailty Scale (CSHA-CFS), were collected at enrollment and 3 mo intervals following discharge for 1 y. Surveys queried the total number and timing of falls. Changes in frailty over time were assessed by logistic regression and area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled. FRAIL Scale and CSHA-CFS scores did not change over time, but TSFI scores did (P ≤ 0.01). Worsening frailty was observed using TSFI at 6 (P ≤ 0.01) and 12 mo (P ≤ 0.01) relative to baseline. Mortality did not differ based on frailty using any frailty score. Increasing frailty scores and time postdischarge was associated with increased odds of a fall. AUC estimates with 95% CI were 0.72 [0.64, 0.80], 0.81 [0.74, 0.88], and 0.76 [0.68, 0.84] for the FRAIL Scale, TSFI, and CSHA-CFS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of falls postdischarge were associated with increased age, time postdischarge, and frailty in our population. No scale appeared to significantly outperform the other by AUC estimation. Further study on the longitudinal effects of frailty is warranted.
Authors: Mohammad Hamidi; Muhammad Zeeshan; Valeria Leon-Risemberg; Janko Nikolich-Zugich; Kamil Hanna; Narong Kulvatunyou; Abdul Tawab Saljuqi; Mindy Fain; Bellal Joseph Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Judy A Stevens; Michael F Ballesteros; Karin A Mack; Rose A Rudd; Erin DeCaro; Gerald Adler Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Zoë Hyde; Leon Flicker; Osvaldo P Almeida; Graeme J Hankey; Kieran A McCaul; S A Paul Chubb; Bu B Yeap Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2010-04-21 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: John E Morley; Bruno Vellas; G Abellan van Kan; Stefan D Anker; Juergen M Bauer; Roberto Bernabei; Matteo Cesari; W C Chumlea; Wolfram Doehner; Jonathan Evans; Linda P Fried; Jack M Guralnik; Paul R Katz; Theodore K Malmstrom; Roger J McCarter; Luis M Gutierrez Robledo; Ken Rockwood; Stephan von Haehling; Maurits F Vandewoude; Jeremy Walston Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Victoria S McDonald; Kimberly A Thompson; Paul R Lewis; C Beth Sise; Michael J Sise; Steven R Shackford Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Isaac C Slagel; Victor Hatcher; Kathleen S Romanowski; Dionne A Skeete; Colette Galet Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2022-10-20 Impact factor: 2.374