Hans Flaatten1, Bertrand Guidet2, Finn H Andersen3,4, Antonio Artigas5, Maurizio Cecconi6, Ariane Boumendil7, Muhammed Elhadi8, Jesper Fjølner9, Michael Joannidis10, Christian Jung11, Susannah Leaver12, Brian Marsh13, Rui Moreno14, Sandra Oeyen15, Yuriy Nalapko16, Joerg C Schefold17, Wojciech Szczeklik18, Sten Walther19, Ximena Watson20, Tilemachos Zafeiridis21, Dylan W de Lange22. 1. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Dep of Clinical Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital Bergen Norway, University of Bergen, 5019, Bergen, Norway. Hans.flaatten@uib.no. 2. Sorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis D'Epidémiologie Et de Santé Publique, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Service de Réanimation, 75012, Paris, France. 3. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Ålesund Hospital, Ålesund, Norway. 4. Dep of Circulation and Medical Imaging, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway. 5. Deparment of Intensive Care Medicine, CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias, Corporacion Sanitaria Universitaria Parc Tauli, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Sabadell, Spain. 6. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center-IRCCS, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy. 7. AP-HP, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Service de Réanimation, 75012, Paris, France. 8. Faculty of Medicine, University of Tripoli, Tripoli, Libya. 9. Department of Intensive Care, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 10. Division of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. 11. Division of Cardiology, Pulmonology and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine- University, Düsseldorf, Germany. 12. Research Lead Critical Care Directorate St George's Hospital, London, UK. 13. Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. 14. Faculdade de Ciências Médicas de Lisboa (Nova Médical School), Unidade de Cuidados Intensivos Neurocríticos E Trauma. Hospital de São José, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal. 15. Department of Intensive Care 1K12IC, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium. 16. European Wellness International, ICU, Luhansk, Ukraine. 17. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Inselspital, Universitätsspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 18. Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine Division, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland. 19. Heart Center, Linkoping University Hospital, Linkoping, Sweden. 20. ICU, St George's University Hospital, London, UK. 21. Intensive Care Unit General Hospital of Larissa, Larissa, Greece. 22. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Dutch Poisons Information Center (DPIC), University Medical Center, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Frailty is a valuable predictor for outcome in elderly ICU patients, and has been suggested to be used in various decision-making processes prior to and during an ICU admission. There are many instruments developed to assess frailty, but few of them can be used in emergency situations. In this setting the clinical frailty scale (CFS) is frequently used. The present study is a sub-study within a larger outcome study of elderly ICU patients in Europe (the VIP-2 study) in order to document the reliability of the CFS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the VIP-2 study, 129 ICUs in 20 countries participated in this sub-study. The patients were acute admissions ≥ 80 years of age and frailty was assessed at admission by two independent observers using the CFS. Information was obtained from the patient, if not feasible, from the family/caregivers or from hospital files. The profession of the rater and source of data were recorded along with the score. Interrater variability was calculated using linear weighted kappa analysis. RESULTS: 1923 pairs of assessors were included and background data of patients were similar to the whole cohort (n = 3920). We found a very high inter-rater agreement (weighted kappa 0.86), also in subgroup analyses. The agreement when comparing information from family or hospital records was better than using only direct patient information, and pairs of raters from same profession performed better than from different professions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we documented a high reliability using CFS in this setting. This frailty score could be used more frequently in elderly ICU patients in order to create a more holistic and realistic impression of the patient´s condition prior to ICU admission.
PURPOSE: Frailty is a valuable predictor for outcome in elderly ICU patients, and has been suggested to be used in various decision-making processes prior to and during an ICU admission. There are many instruments developed to assess frailty, but few of them can be used in emergency situations. In this setting the clinical frailty scale (CFS) is frequently used. The present study is a sub-study within a larger outcome study of elderly ICU patients in Europe (the VIP-2 study) in order to document the reliability of the CFS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the VIP-2 study, 129 ICUs in 20 countries participated in this sub-study. The patients were acute admissions ≥ 80 years of age and frailty was assessed at admission by two independent observers using the CFS. Information was obtained from the patient, if not feasible, from the family/caregivers or from hospital files. The profession of the rater and source of data were recorded along with the score. Interrater variability was calculated using linear weighted kappa analysis. RESULTS: 1923 pairs of assessors were included and background data of patients were similar to the whole cohort (n = 3920). We found a very high inter-rater agreement (weighted kappa 0.86), also in subgroup analyses. The agreement when comparing information from family or hospital records was better than using only direct patient information, and pairs of raters from same profession performed better than from different professions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we documented a high reliability using CFS in this setting. This frailty score could be used more frequently in elderly ICU patients in order to create a more holistic and realistic impression of the patient´s condition prior to ICU admission.
Authors: J Alberto Silva-Obregón; Manuel Quintana-Díaz; Sonia Saboya-Sánchez; Carlos Marian-Crespo; M Ángel Romera-Ortega; Carlos Chamorro-Jambrina; Alfonso Estrella-Alonso; Eva María Andrés-Esteban Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: René Robert; Nancy Kentish-Barnes; Alexandre Boyer; Alexandra Laurent; Elie Azoulay; Jean Reignier Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2020-06-17 Impact factor: 6.925
Authors: Marleen G A M van der Velde; Merel J van der Aa; Merel H C van Daal; Marjolein N T Kremers; Carolina J P W Keijsers; Sander M J van Kuijk; Harm R Haak Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 4.070
Authors: Ilena Müller; Marco Mancinetti; Anja Renner; Pierre-Olivier Bridevaux; Martin H Brutsche; Christian Clarenbach; Christian Garzoni; Alexandra Lenoir; Bruno Naccini; Sebastian Ott; Lise Piquilloud; Maura Prella; Yok-Ai Que; Paola Marina Soccal; Christophe von Garnier; Thomas K Geiser; Manuela Funke-Chambour; Sabina Guler Journal: BMJ Open Respir Res Date: 2022-04
Authors: Josh McGovern; Yassir Al-Azzawi; Olivia Kemp; Peter Moffitt; Conor Richards; Ross D Dolan; Barry J Laird; Donald C McMillan; Donogh Maguire Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 5.531