Restricted mean survival time versus conventional effect summary for treatment decision-making: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment effect is typically summarized in terms of relative risk reduction or number needed to treat ("conventional effect summary"). Restricted mean survival time (RMST) summarizes treatment effect in terms of a gain or loss in event-free days. Older adults' preference between the two effect summary measures has not been studied. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study using a quantitative survey and qualitative semi-structured interviews. For the survey, we enrolled 102 residents with hypertension at five senior housing facilities (mean age 81.3 years, 82 female, 95 white race). We randomly assigned respondents to either RMST-based (n = 49) or conventional decision aid (n = 53) about the benefits and harms of intensive versus standard blood pressure-lowering strategies and compared decision conflict scale (DCS) responses (range: 0 [no conflict] to 100 [maximum conflict]; <25 is associated with implementing decisions). We used a purposive sample of 23 survey respondents stratified by both their random assignment and DCS from the survey. Inductive qualitative thematic analysis explored complementary perspectives on preferred ways of summarizing treatment effects. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) total DCS was 22.0 (14.3) for the conventional decision aid group and 16.7 (14.1) for the RMST-based decision aid group (p = 0.06), but the proportion of participants with a DCS <25 was higher in the RMST-based group (26 [49.1%] vs 34 [69.4%]; p = 0.04). Qualitative interviews suggested that, regardless of effect summary measure, older individuals' preference depended on their ability to clearly comprehend quantitative information, clarity of presentation in the visual aid, and inclusion of desired information. CONCLUSIONS: When choosing a blood pressure-lowering strategy, older adults' perceived uncertainty may be reduced with a time-based effect summary, although our study was underpowered to detect a statistically significant difference. Given highly variable individual preferences, it may be useful to present both conventional and RMST-based information in decision aids.

Feasibility of implementing a telephone-based frailty assessment.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing literature on the importance of identifying and managing frailty, its assessment has been limited in clinical settings. With the goal of integrating frailty assessment into routine clinical practice, this quality improvement project aimed to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of administering a telephone-based frailty assessment. METHODS: Between 9/2020 and 6/2021, we identified 169 established patients with serious illnesses in an academic primary care-geriatric clinic. Patients were contacted via telephone, and their current medical, functional, nutritional, cognitive, and mood statuses were assessed using validated screening tools. A deficit-accumulation frailty score was then calculated using an electronic medical record-based frailty index calculator and standardized documentation with recommendations was generated for providers. The primary outcome was feasibility, measured as the proportion of patients successfully assessed. Secondary outcomes included completion rates of each domain, administration time, providers' perception, and clinical utility of the assessment. RESULTS: A total of 139 (82.2%) patients, mean age of 82 years, 63.3% frail were successfully assessed. Of the 139 assessments, medical and functional domains were completed for all, while nutrition, mood, and cognition were completed by 88.5% (n = 123), 68.3% (n = 95), and 59.7% (n = 83) of the time, respectively. Conducting the full assessment took an average (standard deviation) time of 26.1 (7.3) minutes. Without the cognitive and mood domain, assessment took an average of 15.7 (7.5) minutes. Patients' providers found the information from the assessment helpful in evaluating and managing their patients. Care plans of 51.8% and 65.0% of patients who had mobility and mind issues, respectively, addressed these domains within 30 days after the assessment. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the telephone-based frailty assessment is feasible, acceptable, and has the potential to influence the care plans of older adults. This work demonstrated how frailty assessment can be integrated with the outpatient setting.

Recovery from Coronavirus Disease 2019 among Older Adults in Post-Acute Skilled Nursing Facilities.

OBJECTIVES: To examine functional outcomes of post-acute care for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-three community-dwelling adults ≥65 years of age admitted for post-acute care from 2 SNFs from March 15, 2020, to May 30, 2020. MEASURE(S): COVID-19 status was determined from chart review. Frailty was measured with a deficit accumulation frailty index (FI), categorized into nonfrail, mild frailty, and moderate-to-severe frailty. The primary outcome was community discharge. Secondary outcomes included change in functional status from SNF admission to discharge, based on modified Barthel index (mBI) and continuous functional scale scored by physical (PT) and occupational therapists (OT). RESULTS: Among 73 admissions (31 COVID-19 negative, 42 COVID-19 positive), mean [standard deviation (SD)] age was 83.5 (8.8) and 42 (57.5%) were female, with mean FI of 0.31 (0.01) with no differences by COVID-19 status. The mean length of SNF stay for rehabilitation was 21.2 days (SD 11.1) for COVID-19 negative with 20 (64.5%) patients discharged to community, compared to 23.0 (SD 12.2) and 31 (73.8%) among patients who tested positive for COVID-19. Among those discharged to the community, all groups improved in mBI, PT, and OT score. Those with moderate-to-severe frailty (FI >0.35) had lower mBI scores on discharge [92.0 (6.7) not frail, 81.0 (15.4) mild frailty, 48.6 (20.4) moderate-to-severe frailty; P = .002], lower PT scores on discharge [54.2 (3.9) nonfrail, 51.5 (8.0) mild frailty, 37.1 (9.7) moderate-to-severe frailty; P = .002], and lower OT score on discharge [52.9 (3.2) nonfrail, 45.8 (9.4) mild frailty, 32.4 (7.4) moderate or worse frailty; P = .001]. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Older adults admitted to a SNF for post-acute care with COVID-19 had community discharge rates and functional improvement comparable to a COVID-19 negative group. However, those who are frailer at admission tended to have lower function at discharge.