Rachel E Ward1,2,3, Ariela R Orkaby2, Clark Dumontier2,4,5, Brian Charest1, Chelsea E Hawley1, Enzo Yaksic1, Lien Quach1,6, Dae H Kim5, David R Gagnon1,7, J Michael Gaziano1,4, Kelly Cho1,4, Luc Djousse1,4, Jane A Driver1,2,4. 1. Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC), VA Boston HealthCare System, USA. 2. New England Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), VA Boston HealthCare System, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Division of Aging, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Department of Gerontology, University of Massachusetts Boston, USA. 7. Boston University School of Public Health Department of Biostatistics, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic frailty indices (eFIs) are increasingly used to identify patients at risk for morbidity and mortality. Whether eFIs capture the spectrum of frailty change, including decline, stability, and improvement, is unknown. METHODS: In a nationwide retrospective birth cohort of U.S. Veterans, a validated eFI, including 31 health deficits, was calculated annually using medical record and insurance claims data (2002-2012). K-means clustering was used to assign patients into frailty trajectories measured 5 years prior to death. RESULTS: There were 214 250 veterans born between 1927 and 1934 (mean [SD] age at death = 79.4 [2.8] years, 99.2% male, 90.3% White) with an annual eFI in the 5 years before death. Nine frailty trajectories were identified. Those starting at nonfrail or prefrail had 2 stable trajectories (nonfrail to prefrail, n = 29 786 and stable prefrail, n = 28 499) and 2 rapidly increasing trajectories (prefrail to moderately frail, n = 28 244 and prefrail to severely frail, n = 22 596). Those who were mildly frail at baseline included 1 gradually increasing trajectory (mildly to moderately frail, n = 33 806) and 1 rapidly increasing trajectory (mildly to severely frail, n = 15 253). Trajectories that started at moderately or severely frail included 2 gradually increasing trajectories (moderately to severely frail, n = 27 662 and progressing severely frail, n = 14 478) and 1 recovering trajectory (moderately frail to mildly frail, n = 13 926). CONCLUSIONS: Nine frailty trajectories, including 1 recovering trajectory, were identified in this cohort of older U.S. Veterans. Future work is needed to understand whether prevention and treatment strategies can improve frailty trajectories and contribute to compression of morbidity toward the end of life. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America 2021.
BACKGROUND: Electronic frailty indices (eFIs) are increasingly used to identify patients at risk for morbidity and mortality. Whether eFIs capture the spectrum of frailty change, including decline, stability, and improvement, is unknown. METHODS: In a nationwide retrospective birth cohort of U.S. Veterans, a validated eFI, including 31 health deficits, was calculated annually using medical record and insurance claims data (2002-2012). K-means clustering was used to assign patients into frailty trajectories measured 5 years prior to death. RESULTS: There were 214 250 veterans born between 1927 and 1934 (mean [SD] age at death = 79.4 [2.8] years, 99.2% male, 90.3% White) with an annual eFI in the 5 years before death. Nine frailty trajectories were identified. Those starting at nonfrail or prefrail had 2 stable trajectories (nonfrail to prefrail, n = 29 786 and stable prefrail, n = 28 499) and 2 rapidly increasing trajectories (prefrail to moderately frail, n = 28 244 and prefrail to severely frail, n = 22 596). Those who were mildly frail at baseline included 1 gradually increasing trajectory (mildly to moderately frail, n = 33 806) and 1 rapidly increasing trajectory (mildly to severely frail, n = 15 253). Trajectories that started at moderately or severely frail included 2 gradually increasing trajectories (moderately to severely frail, n = 27 662 and progressing severely frail, n = 14 478) and 1 recovering trajectory (moderately frail to mildly frail, n = 13 926). CONCLUSIONS: Nine frailty trajectories, including 1 recovering trajectory, were identified in this cohort of older U.S. Veterans. Future work is needed to understand whether prevention and treatment strategies can improve frailty trajectories and contribute to compression of morbidity toward the end of life. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America 2021.
Authors: Eric B French; Jeremy McCauley; Maria Aragon; Pieter Bakx; Martin Chalkley; Stacey H Chen; Bent J Christensen; Hongwei Chuang; Aurelie Côté-Sergent; Mariacristina De Nardi; Elliott Fan; Damien Échevin; Pierre-Yves Geoffard; Christelle Gastaldi-Ménager; Mette Gørtz; Yoko Ibuka; John B Jones; Malene Kallestrup-Lamb; Martin Karlsson; Tobias J Klein; Grégoire de Lagasnerie; Pierre-Carl Michaud; Owen O'Donnell; Nigel Rice; Jonathan S Skinner; Eddy van Doorslaer; Nicolas R Ziebarth; Elaine Kelly Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Supriya G Mohile; William Dale; Mark R Somerfield; Mara A Schonberg; Cynthia M Boyd; Peggy S Burhenn; Beverly Canin; Harvey Jay Cohen; Holly M Holmes; Judith O Hopkins; Michelle C Janelsins; Alok A Khorana; Heidi D Klepin; Stuart M Lichtman; Karen M Mustian; William P Tew; Arti Hurria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jeffrey T Howard; Jonathan A Sosnov; Jud C Janak; Adi V Gundlapalli; Warren B Pettey; Lauren E Walker; Ian J Stewart Journal: Hypertension Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Supriya G Mohile; Ronald M Epstein; Arti Hurria; Charles E Heckler; Beverly Canin; Eva Culakova; Paul Duberstein; Nikesha Gilmore; Huiwen Xu; Sandy Plumb; Megan Wells; Lisa M Lowenstein; Marie A Flannery; Michelle Janelsins; Allison Magnuson; Kah Poh Loh; Amber S Kleckner; Karen M Mustian; Judith O Hopkins; Jane Jijun Liu; Jodi Geer; Rita Gorawara-Bhat; Gary R Morrow; William Dale Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 31.777