Assessing frailty in elderly patients with hip fractures: A retrospective review comparing geriatrician and orthopedic trainee assessments.

To assess the correlation of orthopedic surgery residents compared with expert geriatricians in the assessment of frailty stage using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in patients with hip fractures. A retrospective chart review was performed from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019. Patients admitted with a diagnosis of hip fracture were identified. Those patients with a CFS score completed by orthopedic residents with subsequent CFS score completed by a geriatrician during their admission were extracted. Six hundred and forty-eight patients over age 60 (mean 80.5 years, 73.5% female) were admitted during the study period. Orthopaedic residents completed 286 assessments in 44% of admissions. Geriatric medicine consultation was available for 215 patients such that 93 patients were assessed by both teams. Paired CFS data were extracted from the charts and tested for agreement between the 2 groups of raters. CFS assessments by orthopedic residents and geriatrician experts were significantly different at P < .05; orthopedic residents typically assessed patients to be one CFS grade less frail than geriatricians. Despite this, the CFS assessments showed good agreement between residents and geriatricians. Orthopaedic surgery residents are reliable assessors of frailty but tend to underestimate frailty level compared with specialist geriatricians. Given the evidence to support models such as orthogeriatrics to improve outcomes for frail patients, our findings suggest that orthopedic residents may be well positioned to identify patients who could benefit from such early interventions. Our findings also support recent evidence that frailty assessments by orthopedic surgeons may have predictive validity. Low rates of initial frailty assessment by orthopedic residents suggests that further work is required to integrate more global comprehensive care.

International Group for Reducing Inappropriate Medication Use & Polypharmacy (IGRIMUP): Position Statement and 10 Recommendations for Action.

Globally, the number of drug prescriptions is increasing causing more adverse drug events, which is now a significant cause of mortality, morbidity, and disability that has reached epidemic proportions. The risk of adverse drug events is correlated to very old age, multiple co-morbidities, dementia, frailty, and limited life expectancy, with the major contributor being polypharmacy. Each characteristic alters the risk-benefit balance of medications, typically reducing anticipated benefits and amplifying risk. Current clinical guidelines are based on evidence proven in younger/healthier adult populations using a single disease model and their application to older adults with multimorbidity, in whom testing has not been conducted, yields a different risk-benefit prospect and makes inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy inevitable. Applying inappropriate clinical practice guidelines to older adults is antithetical to good healthcare, is likely to increase health inequity, and is associated with substantial negative clinical, economic, and social implications for health systems. The casualties are on the scale of a war or epidemic, yet are usually invisible in measures of healthcare quality and formal recommendations. Radical and rapid action is required to achieve a better quality of life for older populations and to remain true to the principles of medical professionalism and evidence-based medicine that place patients' interests and autonomy at the fore. This first International Group for Reducing Inappropriate Medication Use & Polypharmacy position statement briefly details the causes, consequences, and extent of inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy. This article outlines current strategies to reduce inappropriate medication use, provides evidence for their effect, and then proposes recommendations for moving forward with 10 recommendations for action and 12 recommendations for research. We conclude that an urgent integrated effort to reduce inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy should be a leading global target of the highest priority. The cornerstone of this position statement from the International Group for Reducing Inappropriate Medication Use & Polypharmacy is the understanding that without evidence of definite relevant benefit, when it comes to prescribing, for many older patients 'less is more'. This approach differs from most other current recommendations and guidance in medical care, as the focus is on what, when, and how to stop, rather than on when to start medications/interventions. Disrupting the framework that indiscriminately applies standard guidelines to older adults requires a new approach that better serves patients with multimorbidity. This transition requires a shift in medical education, research, and diagnostic frameworks, and re-examination of the measures used as quality indicators. In achieving this objective, we promote a return to some of the original concepts of evidence-based medicine: which considers scientific data (where it exists), clinical judgment, patient/family preference, and context. A shift is needed: from the current model that focuses on single conditions to one that simultaneously considers multiple conditions and patient priorities. This approach reframes the clinician's role as a professional providing care, rather than a disease technician.

Using the Frailty Assessment for Care Planning Tool (FACT) to screen elderly chronic kidney disease patients for frailty: the nurse experience.

PURPOSE: Recent evidence supports the prognostic significance of frailty for functional decline and poor health outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease. Yet, despite the development of clinical tools to screen for frailty, little is known about the experiential impact of screening for frailty in this setting. The Frailty Assessment for Care Planning Tool (FACT) evaluates frailty across 4 domains: mobility, function, social circumstances, and cognition. The purpose of this qualitative study was as follows: 1) explore the nurse experience of screening for frailty using the FACT tool in a specialized outpatient renal clinic; 2) determine how, if at all, provider perceptions of frailty changed after implementation of the frailty screening tool; and 3) determine the perceived factors that influence uptake and administration of the FACT screening tool in a specialized clinical setting. METHODS: A semi-structured interview of 5 nurses from the Nova Scotia Health Authority, Central Zone Renal Clinic was conducted. A grounded theory approach was used to generate thematic categories and analysis models. RESULTS: Four primary themes emerged in the data analysis: "we were skeptical", "we made it work", "we learned how", and "we understand". As the renal nurses gained a sense of confidence in their ability to implement the FACT tool, initial barriers to implementation were attenuated. Implementation factors - such as realistic goals, clear guidelines, and ongoing training - were important factors for successful uptake of the frailty screening initiative. CONCLUSION: Nurse participants reported an overall positive experience using the FACT method to screen for frailty and indicated that their understanding of the multiple dimensions and subtleties of "frailty" were enhanced. Future nurse-led FACT screening initiatives should incorporate those factors identified as being integral to program success: realistic goals, clear guidelines, and ongoing training. Adopting the evaluation of frailty as a priority within clinical departments will encourage sustainability.

Frailty in end-stage renal disease: comparing patient, caregiver, and clinician perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with poor outcomes for patients on dialysis and is traditionally measured using tools that assess physical impairment. Alternate measurement tools highlight cognitive and functional domains, requiring clinician, patient, and/or caregiver input. In this study, we compared frailty measures for incident dialysis patients that incorporate patient, clinician, and caregiver perspectives with an aim to contrast the measured prevalence of frailty using tools derived from different conceptual frameworks. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of incident dialysis patients was conducted between February 2014 and June 2015. Frailty was assessed at dialysis onset using: 1) modified definition of Fried Phenotype (Dialysis Morbidity Mortality Study definition, DMMS); 2) Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS); 3) Frailty Assessment Care Planning Tool (provides CFS grading, FACT-CFS); and 4) Frailty Index (FI). Measures were compared via correlation and sensitivity/specificity analyses. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients participated (mean age of 61 ± 14 years). Participants were primarily Caucasian (91%), male (58%), and the majority started on hemodialysis (83%). The median score for both the CFS and FACT-CFS was 4 (interquartile range of 3-5). The mean FI score was 0.31 (standard deviation ± 0.16). The DMMS identified 78% of patients as frail. The FACT-CFS demonstrated highest correlation (r = 0.71) with the FI, while the DMMS was most sensitive (97%, 100%) and a CFS ≥ 5 most specific (100%, 77%) at corresponding FI cutoff values (>0.21, >0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty assessments of incident dialysis patients that include clinician, caregiver and patient perspectives have moderate to strong correlation with the FI. At specified FI cutoff values, the FACT-CFS and DMMS are highly sensitive measures of frailty. The CFS and FACT-CFS may represent viable alternative screening tools in dialysis patients.

Screening for Frailty in Canada's Health Care System: A Time for Action.

As Canada's population ages, frailty - with its increased risk of functional decline, deterioration in health status, and death - will become increasingly common. The physiology of frailty reflects its multisystem, multi-organ origins. About a quarter of Canadians over age 65 are frail, increasing to over half in those older than 85. Our health care system is organized around single-organ systems, impairing our ability to effectively treat people having multiple disorders and functional limitations. To address frailty, we must recognize when it occurs, increase awareness of its significance, develop holistic models of care, and generate better evidence for its treatment. Recognizing how frailty impacts lifespan will allow for integration of care goals into treatment options. Different settings in the Canadian health care system will require different strategies and tools to assess frailty. Given the magnitude of challenges frailty poses for the health care system as currently organized, policy changes will be essential.

End of Life Care in Frailty.

The increasing prevalence of frailty within the aging population poses challenges to current models of chronic disease management and end-of-life care delivery. As frailty progresses, individuals face an increasing frequency of acute health issues requiring medical attention. The ability of health care systems to recognize and respond to acute health issues in frail patients using a holistic understanding of health and prognosis will play a central role in ensuring their effective and appropriate care, including that at the end of their lives. This chapter reviews the history of palliative care and the elements of frailty that require the modification of current models of palliative care. In addition, tools and models for recognition of end of life in frailty and considerations for symptom management are introduced.

Evidence-informed guidelines for treating frail older adults with type 2 diabetes: from the Diabetes Care Program of Nova Scotia (DCPNS) and the Palliative and Therapeutic Harmonization (PATH) program.

Clinical practice guidelines specific to the medical care of frail older adults have yet to be widely disseminated. Because of the complex conditions associated with frailty, guidelines for frail older patients should be based on careful consideration of the characteristics of this population, balanced against the benefits and harms associated with treatment. In response to this need, the Diabetes Care Program of Nova Scotia (DCPNS) collaborated with the Palliative and Therapeutic Harmonization (PATH) program to develop and disseminate guidelines for the treatment of frail older adults with type 2 diabetes. The DCPNS/PATH guidelines are unique in that they recommend the following: 1. Maintain HbA1c at or above 8% rather than below a specific level, in keeping with the conclusion that lower HbA1c levels are associated with increased hypoglycemic events without accruing meaningful benefit for frail older adults with type 2 diabetes. The guideline supports a wide range of acceptable HbA1c targets so that treatment decisions can focus on whether to aim for HbA1c levels between 8% and 9% or within a higher range (ie, >9% and <12%) based on individual circumstances and symptoms. 2. Simplify treatment by administering basal insulin alone and avoiding administration of regular and rapid-acting insulin when feasible. This recommendation takes into account the variations in oral intake that are commonly associated with frailty. 3. Use neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin instead of long-acting insulin analogues, such as insulin glargine (Lantus) or insulin detemir (Levemir), as insulin analogues do not appear to provide clinically meaningful benefit but are significantly more costly. 4. With acceptance of more liberalized blood glucose targets, there is no need for routine blood glucose testing when oral hypoglycemic medications or well-established doses of basal insulin (used alone) are not routinely changed as a result of blood glucose testing.Although these recommendations may appear radical, they are based on careful review of research findings.

Palliative and therapeutic harmonization: a model for appropriate decision-making in frail older adults.

Frail older adults face increasingly complex decisions regarding medical care. The Palliative and Therapeutic Harmonization (PATH) model provides a structured approach that places frailty at the forefront of medical and surgical decision-making in older adults. Preliminary data from the first 150 individuals completing the PATH program shows that the population served is frail (mean Clinical Frailty Score = 6.3), has multiple comorbidities (mean 8), and takes many medications (mean = 9). Ninety-two percent of participants were able to complete decision-making for an average of three current or projected health issues, most often (76.7%) with the help of a substitute decision-maker (SDM). Decisions to proceed with scheduled medical or surgical interventions correlated with baseline frailty level and dementia stage, with participants with a greater degree of frailty (odds ratio (OR) = 3.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.39-8.38) or more-advanced stage of dementia (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.06-2.65) being more likely to choose less-aggressive treatment options. Although the PATH model is in the development stage, further evaluation is ongoing, including a qualitative analysis of the SDM experience of PATH and an assessment of the effectiveness of PATH in long-term care. The results of these studies will inform the design of a larger randomized controlled trial.

Respecting frailty.

While the medical treatment of older individuals often results in desirable outcomes, indiscriminate use of aggressive treatment at the end-of-life can cause paradoxical harm and suffering. Comprehensive assessment and communication can help foster decisions that consider the effect of frailty on health outcomes.

Executive dysfunction in vascular cognitive impairment in the consortium to investigate vascular impairment of cognition study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The importance of executive dysfunction is increasingly recognized in the dementia syndrome. Although executive dysfunction has been associated with subcortical ischemic lesions, it may not be unique to VCI or to its clinical subtypes. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the CIVIC study, a multi-centre memory clinic cohort study. An executive dysfunction index variable was created using 30 items from the clinical evaluation. RESULTS: Of 1347 patients, 151 had a baseline diagnosis of no cognitive impairment (NCI), 463 had AD, 324 had VCI, 97 had vascular cognitive impairment not dementia (VCI-ND) and 253 had non-vascular CIND. Those with VCI and AD had higher mean executive dysfunction index values than those with NCI (F=160.2, p<0.01). Within the VCI subtypes, people with VaD and mixed dementia had the highest mean executive dysfunction index values (F=92.5, p<0.01). Higher executive dysfunction index values were significantly correlated with lower MMSE scores (R=0.70, p<0.01), higher Functional Rating Scale scores (R=0.77, p<0.01) and higher Geriatric Depression Score values (R=0.11, p<0.01). Compared to those who had a lower burden of executive dysfunction, patients with more executive dysfunction (index values >=0.2) were more likely to be institutionalized (HR=5.2, p<0.01) or to die (HR=2.4, p<0.01) during the next 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: Executive dysfunction is common in both AD and VCI. It is associated with poor performance on other measures of cognition and function. The presence of executive dysfunction is associated with worse near-term outcomes.

Disease progression in vascular cognitive impairment: cognitive, functional and behavioural outcomes in the Consortium to Investigate Vascular Impairment of Cognition (CIVIC) cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Empirical studies to clarify the outcomes in Vascular Cognitive Impairment (VCI) are needed. We compared cognitive, functional, and behavioural outcomes in patients with VCI to patients with no cognitive impairment (NCI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Secondary analysis of the Consortium to Investigate Vascular Impairment of Cognition (CIVIC), a multi-centre Canadian memory clinic 30-month cohort study. RESULTS: Of 1347 patients, 938 were eligible for follow-up, of whom 239 (24.5%) were lost and 29 (3%) had died. Of the remaining 697 patients, 125 had NCI, 229 had VCI, and 343 had AD at baseline. Compared to people with NCI, of whom 20-40% showed progression based on cognitive and functional measures, those with VCI were more likely to progress (50-65%), as were people with AD (50-80%) (p<0.01). More people with VCI showed progression of affective symptoms (30%) than those with NCI (12%) or AD (15% p<0.01). Progression of impaired judgment (rated clinically) in VCI (15%) was similar to AD (11%) but more common than in NCI (4%, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Most people with VCI show readily detectable progression by 30 months. Depressive symptoms were more common and more progressive in VCI than in Alzheimer's disease, whereas clinical evidence of progressive executive dysfunction was common in both AD and VCI.