Geriatric assessment with management for older patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy: a cluster-randomised controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric assessment and management (GAM) improve outcomes in older patients with cancer treated with surgery or chemotherapy. It is unclear whether GAM may provide better function and quality of life (QoL), or be cost-effective, in a radiotherapy (RT) setting. METHODS: In this Norwegian cluster-randomised controlled pilot study, we assessed the impact of a GAM intervention involving specialist and primary health services. It was initiated in-hospital at the start of RT by assessing somatic and mental health, function, and social situation, followed by individually adapted management plans and systematic follow-up in the municipalities until 8 weeks after the end of RT, managed by municipal nurses as patients' care coordinators. Thirty-two municipal/city districts were 1:1 randomised to intervention or conventional care. Patients with cancer ≥ 65 years, referred for RT, were enrolled irrespective of cancer type, treatment intent, and frailty status, and followed the allocation of their residential district. The primary outcome was physical function measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (QLQ-C30). Secondary outcomes were overall quality of life (QoL), physical performance, use and costs of health services. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. Study registration at ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03881137. RESULTS: We included 178 patients, 89 in each group with comparable age (mean 74.1), sex (female 38.2%), and Edmonton Frail Scale scores (mean 3.4 [scale 0-17], scores 0-3 [fit] in 57%). More intervention patients received curative RT (76.4 vs 61.8%), had higher irradiation doses (mean 54.1 vs 45.5 Gy), and longer lasting RT (mean 4.4 vs 3.6 weeks). The primary outcome was completed by 91% (intervention) vs 88% (control) of patients. No significant differences between groups on predefined outcomes were observed. GAM costs represented 3% of health service costs for the intervention group during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: In this heterogeneous cohort of older patients receiving RT, the majority was fit. We found no impact of the intervention on patient-centred outcomes or the cost of health services. Targeting a more homogeneous group of only pre-frail and frail patients is strongly recommended in future studies needed to clarify the role and organisation of GAM in RT settings.

Edmonton Frail Scale predicts mortality in older patients with cancer undergoing radiotherapy-A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Several screening tools are developed to identify frailty in the increasing number of older patients with cancer. Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) performs well in geriatric settings but is less studied in oncology. We aimed to investigate if EFS score (continuous and categorical) predicts survival in patients referred for radiotherapy, and to assess the concurrent validity of EFS compared with a modified geriatric assessment (mGA). METHODS: Prospective observational, single-center study including patients ≥65 years, referred for curative or palliative radiotherapy for confirmed cancer. Patients underwent mGA (assessment of cognition, mobility, falls, comorbidity, polypharmacy, depression, nutrition, and activities of daily living) and screening with EFS prior to radiotherapy. The predictive value of EFS score of two-year overall survival (OS) was assessed by Kaplan-Meier plots and compared by log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards regression model was estimated to adjust the associations for major cancer-related factors. Concurrent validity of EFS in relation to mGA was estimated by Spearman`s correlation coefficient and ordinal regression. Sensitivity and specificity for different cut-offs was assessed. RESULTS: Patients' (n = 301) mean age was 73.6 (SD 6.3) years, 159 (52.8%) were men, 54% received curative-intent treatment, breast cancer (32%) was the most prevalent diagnosis. According to EFS≥6, 101 (33.7%) were classified as frail. EFS score was predictive of OS [hazard ratio (HR) 1.20 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-1.30)], as was increasing severity assessed by categorical EFS (p<0.001). There was a strong correlation between EFS score and number of geriatric impairments (Spearman`s correlation coefficient 0.77). EFS cut-off ≥6 had a sensitivity of 0.97 and specificity of 0.57 for identifying patients with minimum two geriatric impairments. CONCLUSION: EFS predicts mortality in older patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy, and it is a quick (<5 minutes) and sensitive screening tool to identify patients who may benefit from a geriatric assessment.

Cognitive Trajectories in Older Patients with Cancer Undergoing Radiotherapy-A Prospective Observational Study.

Cognitive function can be affected by cancer and/or its treatment, and older patients are at a particular risk. In a prospective observational study including patients ≥65 years referred for radiotherapy (RT), we aimed to investigate the association between patient- and cancer-related factors and cognitive function, as evaluated by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and sought to identify groups with distinct MoCA trajectories. The MoCA was performed at baseline (T0), RT completion (T1), and 8 (T2) and 16 (T3) weeks later, with scores ranging between 0 and 30 and higher scores indicating better function. Linear regression and growth mixture models were estimated to assess associations and to identify groups with distinct MoCA trajectories, respectively. Among 298 patients with a mean age of 73.6 years (SD 6.3), the baseline mean MoCA score was 24.0 (SD 3.7). Compared to Norwegian norm data, 37.9% had cognitive impairment. Compromised cognition was independently associated with older age, lower education, and physical impairments. Four groups with distinct trajectories were identified: the very poor (6.4%), poor (8.1%), fair (37.9%), and good (47.7%) groups. The MoCA trajectories were mainly stable. We conclude that cognitive impairment was frequent but, for most patients, was not affected by RT. For older patients with cancer, and in particular for those with physical impairments, we recommend an assessment of cognitive function.

Geriatric assessment with management for older patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy. Protocol of a Norwegian cluster-randomised controlled pilot study.

About 50% of patients with cancer are expected to need radiotherapy (RT), and the majority of these are older. To improve outcomes for older patients with cancer, geriatric assessment (GA) with management (GAM) is highly recommended. Evidence for its benefits is still scarce, in particular for patients receiving RT. We report the protocol of a cluster-randomised pilot study designed to test the effect, feasibility and health economic impact of a GAM intervention for patients ≥65 years, referred for palliative or curative RT. The randomising units are municipalities and city districts. The intervention is municipality-based and carried out in collaboration between hospital and municipal health services from the start of RT to eight weeks after the end of RT. Its main constituents are an initial GA followed by measures adapted to individual patients' impairments and needs, systematic symptom assessments and regular follow-up by municipal cancer nurses, appointed to coordinate the patient's care. Follow-up includes at least one weekly phone call, and a house call four weeks after the end of RT. All patients receive an individually adapted physical exercise program and nutritional counselling. Detailed guidelines for management of patients' impairments are provided. Patients allocated to the intervention group will be compared to controls receiving standard care. The primary outcome is physical function assessed by the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C-30. Secondary outcomes are global quality of life, objectively tested physical performance and use of health care services. Economic evaluation will be based on a comparison of costs and effects (measured by the main outcome measures). Feasibility will be assessed with mixed methodology, based on log notes and questionnaires filled in by the municipal nurses and interviews with patients and nurses. The study is carried out at two Norwegian RT centres. It was opened in May 2019. Follow-up will proceed until June 2022. Statistical analyses will start by the end of 2021. We expect the trial to provide important new knowledge about the effect, feasibility and costs of a GAM intervention for older patients receiving RT. Trial registration: ClinTrials.gov, ID NCT03881137, initial release 13th of March 2019.

Association between preoperative frailty and outcomes among adults undergoing cardiac surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The identification of frailty before complex and invasive procedures may have relevance for prognostic and recovery purposes, to optimally inform patients, caregivers and clinicians about perioperative risk and postoperative care needs. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of frailty and describe the associated clinical course and outcomes of patients referred for nonemergent cardiac surgery. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients aged 50 years and older referred for nonemergent cardiac surgery in Alberta, Canada, from November 2011 to March 2014 were screened preoperatively for frailty, defined as a Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) score of 5 or greater. Postoperatively, patients were followed by telephone to assess CFS score, health services use and vital status. The primary outcome was all-cause hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included health services use, hospital discharge disposition, 1-year health-related quality of life and all-cause 5-year mortality. RESULTS: The cohort (n = 529) had a mean age of 67 (standard deviation [SD] 9) years; 25.9% were female, and the prevalence of frailty was 9.6% (n = 51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3%-12.5%). Frail patients were older (median age 75, interquartile range [IQR] 65-80 v. 67, IQR 60-73, yr; p < 0.001), were more likely to be female (51.0% v. 23.2%; p < 0.001), had a higher mean EuroSCORE II (8, SD 3 v. 5, SD 3; p < 0.001) and received combined coronary artery bypass grafting and valve procedures more frequently (29.4% v. 15.9%; p = 0.02) than nonfrail patients. Postoperatively, frail patients had a longer median duration of stay in the cardiovascular intensive care unit (median difference 2.2, 95% CI 1.60-2.79) and hospital (median difference 9.3, 95% CI 8.2-10.3). Hospital mortality was 9.8% among frail patients and 1.0% among nonfrail patients (adjusted hazard ratio 3.84, 95% CI 0.90-16.34). INTERPRETATION: Preoperative frailty was present in 10% of patients and was associated with a higher risk of morbidity and greater health services use. Preoperative frailty has important implications for the postoperative clinical course and resource utilization of patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

The Impact of Preoperative Frailty on the Clinical and Cost Outcomes of Adult Cardiac Surgery in Alberta, Canada: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information about the impact of frailty on public payer costs in cardiac surgery. This study aimed to determine quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs associated with preoperative frailty in patients referred for cardiac surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively compared costs of frailty in a cohort of 529 patients aged ≥ 50 years who were referred for nonemergent cardiac surgery in Alberta. Patients were screened preoperatively for frailty, defined as a score of 5 or greater on the Clinical Frailty Scale. The primary outcome measure was public payer costs attributable to frailty, calculated in a difference-in-difference (DID) model. RESULTS: The prevalence of frailty was 10% (n = 51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7%-12%). Median (interquartile range) costs for frail patients were higher in the first year postsurgery ($200,709 [$146,177-$486,852] vs $147,730 [$100,674-$177,025]; P < 0.001) compared to nonfrail; the difference-in-difference attributable cost of frailty was $57,836 (95% CI, $-28,608-$144,280). At 1 year, frail patients had fewer QALYs realized compared to nonfrail patients (0.71 [0.57-0.77] vs 0.82 [0.75-0.86], P < 0.001), whereas QALYs gained were similar (0.02 [-0.02-0.05] vs 0.02 [0.00-0.04], P = 0.58, median difference 0.003 [95% CI, -0.01-0.02]) in frail and nonfrail patients. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty screening identified a population with greater impairment in quality-of-life and greater healthcare costs. Costs attributable to frailty represent opportunity costs that should be considered in future cardiac surgical services planning in the context of our aging population and the growing prevalence of frailty.

CONTEXTE: Il existe peu de renseignements concernant les répercussions de la fragilité sur les coûts pour les payeurs publics en chirurgie cardiaque. Cette étude visait à déterminer les années de vie pondérées par la qualité (QALY, pour Quality-Adjusted Life-Years) et les coûts associés à la fragilité préopératoire chez les patients dirigés vers un service de chirurgie cardiaque. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons comparé de façon rétrospective les coûts de la fragilité dans une cohorte de 529 patients âgés de 50 ans ou plus qui ont été dirigés vers un service de chirurgie cardiaque pour une intervention non urgente en Alberta. Un dépistage de la fragilité, définie comme un score de 5 ou plus à l'échelle CFS (Clinical Frailty Scale), a été effectué avant l'intervention. Le principal critère d'évaluation était le coût attribuable à la fragilité pour les payeurs publics, calculé selon un modèle d'écart des différences. RÉSULTATS: La prévalence de la fragilité a été de 10 % (n = 51; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : 7 à 12 %). Les coûts médians (écart interquartile) dans la première année suivant l'intervention chirurgicale ont été plus élevés chez les patients fragiles que chez les patients non fragiles (200 709 $ [146 177 $ à 486 852 $] contre 147 730 $ [100 674 $ à 177 025 $]; p < 0,001); le coût attribuable de la fragilité selon le modèle d'écart des différences a été de 57 836 $ (IC à 95 % : −28 608 $ à 144 280 $). À 1 an, les patients fragiles avaient moins de QALY réalisées que les patients non fragiles (0,71 [0,57 à 0,77] contre 0,82 [0,75 à 0,86]; p < 0,001), alors que le nombre de QALY gagnées était similaire (0,02 [−0,02 à 0,05] contre 0,02 [0,00 à 0,04]; p = 0,58; différence médiane : 0,003 [IC à 95 % : −0,01 à 0,02]) chez les patients fragiles et non fragiles. CONCLUSIONS: Le dépistage de la fragilité a permis de repérer une population associée à une perte plus importante de qualité de vie et à des coûts plus élevés en soins de santé. Les coûts attribuables à la fragilité représentent des coûts de renonciation qui doivent être considérés dans la planification future des services de chirurgie cardiaque, dans le contexte du vieillissement de notre population et de la prévalence croissante de fragilité.

Implementation of population-level screening for frailty among patients admitted to adult intensive care in Alberta, Canada.

PURPOSE: A substantial proportion of patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) are frail; however, the epidemiology of frailty has not been explored at a population-level. Following implementation of a validated frailty measure into a provincial ICU clinical information system, we describe the population-based prevalence and outcomes of frailty in patients admitted to ICUs. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adult admissions to 17 ICUs. Data were captured using eCritical Alberta. A Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) score assigned at ICU admission was used to define the exposure (CFS score ≥ 5). Primary outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital stay, and receipt of organ support. RESULTS: Fifteen thousand two hundred and thirty-eight patients (81%) were assigned a CFS score at ICU admission. Of these, 28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27 to 28) were frail. Prevalence of frailty was 9-43% across ICUs. Frail patients were older [mean (standard deviation) 63 (15) vs 56 (17) yr; P < 0.001], more likely to be male (54% vs 46% female; P < 0.001), and had higher APACHE II scores [22 (8) vs 17 (8); P < 0.001] compared with non-frail patients. Frail patients received less mechanical ventilation (62% vs 68%; P < 0.001) and vasoactive therapy (24% vs 57%; P < 0.001), but more non-invasive ventilation (22% vs 9%; P < 0.001). Frail patients had higher hospital mortality (23% vs 9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.64 to 2.05, along with longer ICU stay (median [interquartile range] 4 [2-8] vs 3 [2-6] days; P < 0.001), and longer hospital stay (16 [8-36] vs 10 [5-20] days; P < 0.001) compared with non-frail patients. CONCLUSION: A validated measure of frailty can be implemented at the population level in ICU. Frailty is common in ICU patients and has implications for health service use and clinical outcomes.

Review of risk assessment tools to predict morbidity and mortality in elderly surgical patients.

BACKGROUND: Informed surgical consent requires accurate estimation of risks and benefits. Multiple risk assessment tools are available; however, most are not widely used or are specific to certain interventions. Assessing surgical risk is especially challenging in elderly patients because of their range of comorbidities, level of frailty, or severity of illness and a number of available surgical interventions. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE from January 2014 to July 2017 for studies that used risk assessment tools in studies on elderly surgical patients. We then sought the original articles describing each assessment tool and subsequent validation studies. CONCLUSIONS: We identified risk assessment tools that can improve surgical risk assessment in elderly surgical patients. The majority of the identified tools are not commonly used for pre-operative risk assessment. NSQIP-PMP, mFI and SURPAS are promising tools. Age is commonly used to predict risk, but frailty may be a more appropriate measure.

Assessment and Utility of Frailty Measures in Critical Illness, Cardiology, and Cardiac Surgery.

Frailty is a clearly emerging theme in acute care medicine, with obvious prognostic and health resource implications. "Frailty" is a term used to describe a multidimensional syndrome of loss of homeostatic reserves that gives rise to a vulnerability to adverse outcomes after relatively minor stressor events. This is conceptually simple, yet there has been little consensus on the operational definition. The gold standard method to diagnose frailty remains a comprehensive geriatric assessment; however, a variety of validated physical performance measures, judgement-based tools, and multidimensional scales are being applied in critical care, cardiology, and cardiac surgery settings, including open cardiac surgery and transcatheter aortic value replacement. Frailty is common among patients admitted to the intensive care unit and correlates with an increased risk for adverse events, increased resource use, and less favourable patient-centred outcomes. Analogous findings have been described across selected acute cardiology and cardiac surgical settings, in particular those that commonly intersect with critical care services. The optimal methods for screening and diagnosing frailty across these settings remains an active area of investigation. Routine assessment for frailty conceivably has numerous purported benefits for patients, families, health care providers, and health administrators through better informed decision-making regarding treatments or goals of care, prognosis for survival, expectations for recovery, risk of complications, and expected resource use. In this review, we discuss the measurement of frailty and its utility in patients with critical illness and in cardiology and cardiac surgery settings.

A prospective multicenter cohort study of frailty in younger critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome characterized by loss of physiologic and cognitive reserve that heightens vulnerability. Frailty has been well described among elderly patients (i.e., 65 years of age or older), but few studies have evaluated frailty in nonelderly patients with critical illness. We aimed to describe the prevalence, correlates, and outcomes associated with frailty among younger critically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 197 consecutive critically ill patients aged 50-64.9 years admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) at six hospitals across Alberta, Canada. Frailty was defined as a score ≥5 on the Clinical Frailty Scale before hospitalization. Multivariable analyses were used to evaluate factors independently associated with frailty before ICU admission and the independent association between frailty and outcome. RESULTS: In the 197 patients in the study, mean (SD) age was 58.5 (4.1) years, 37 % were female, 73 % had three or more comorbid illnesses, and 28 % (n = 55; 95 % CI 22-35) were frail. Factors independently associated with frailty included not being completely independent (adjusted OR [aOR] 4.4, 95 % CI 1.8-11.1), connective tissue disease (aOR 6.0, 95 % CI 2.1-17.0), and hospitalization within the preceding year (aOR 3.3, 95 % CI 1.3-8.1). There were no significant differences between frail and nonfrail patients in reason for admission, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, preference for life support, or treatment intensity. Younger frail patients did not have significantly longer (median [interquartile range]) hospital stay (26 [9-68] days vs. 19 [10-43] days; p = 0.4), but they had greater 1-year rehospitalization rates (61 % vs. 40 %; p = 0.02) and higher 1-year mortality (33 % vs. 20 %; adjusted HR 1.8, 95 % CI 1.0-3.3; p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital frailty is common among younger critically ill patients, and in this study it was associated with higher rates of mortality at 1 year and with rehospitalization. Our data suggest that frailty should be considered in younger adults admitted to the ICU, not just in the elderly. Additional research is needed to further characterize frailty in younger critically ill patients, along with the ideal instruments for identification.

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.

Physicians' use of computerized clinical decision supports to improve medication management in the elderly - the Seniors Medication Alert and Review Technology intervention.

BACKGROUND: Elderly people (aged 65 years or more) are at increased risk of polypharmacy (five or more medications), inappropriate medication use, and associated increased health care costs. The use of clinical decision support (CDS) within an electronic medical record (EMR) could improve medication safety. METHODS: Participatory action research methods were applied to preproduction design and development and postproduction optimization of an EMR-embedded CDS implementation of the Beers' Criteria for medication management and the Cockcroft-Gault formula for estimating glomerular filtration rates (GFR). The "Seniors Medication Alert and Review Technologies" (SMART) intervention was used in primary care and geriatrics specialty clinics. Passive (chart messages) and active (order-entry alerts) prompts exposed potentially inappropriate medications, decreased GFR, and the possible need for medication adjustments. Physician reactions were assessed using surveys, EMR simulations, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews. EMR audit data were used to identify eligible patient encounters, the frequency of CDS events, how alerts were managed, and when evidence links were followed. RESULTS: Analysis of subjective data revealed that most clinicians agreed that CDS appeared at appropriate times during patient care. Although managing alerts incurred a modest time burden, most also agreed that workflow was not disrupted. Prevalent concerns related to clinician accountability and potential liability. Approximately 36% of eligible encounters triggered at least one SMART alert, with GFR alert, and most frequent medication warnings were with hypnotics and anticholinergics. Approximately 25% of alerts were overridden and ~15% elicited an evidence check. CONCLUSION: While most SMART alerts validated clinician choices, they were received as valuable reminders for evidence-informed care and education. Data from this study may aid other attempts to implement Beers' Criteria in ambulatory care EMRs.

Trajectories of health-related quality of life differ by age among adults: results from an eight-year longitudinal study.

To date, only a few studies have assessed determinants of health trajectories using longitudinal health survey data. Multilevel models were used to estimate health-related quality of life trajectories and assess factors associated with variations among trajectories, controlling for mortality effects and cohort membership. Four biennial cycles (1996/97-2004/05) of the Canadian National Population Health Survey were used. Information for 13,665 respondents, including those who were subsequently institutionalized and/or died, was used. A typical life-course trajectory was concave with a slow decline until the age of 60, followed by a more rapid decline. Receiving social assistance, lower education and not being married had significant negative impacts on trajectories for young (age 18-39) and middle-aged (40-64). Chronic conditions and health behaviours such as smoking were important for seniors (65+). It is important to focus on the most relevant and important determinants of health in each phase of life.

Do the determinants of health differ between people living in the community and in institutions?

Determinants of health studies have mainly dealt with samples of community-dwelling subjects. We utilized the 1996/97 Canadian National Population Health Survey community and institutional surveys to identify factors associated with the selection of individuals to institutions. We also assessed whether the same determinants of health variables explain variations in health in those living in the community and those living in institutions. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate factors associated with selection to institutions. Results showed that health status, age, chronic conditions, education, race, marital status, smoking and alcohol were associated with the probability of being in an institution. Multiple linear regression analyses (dependent variable: Health Utilities Index Mark 3 [HUI3] score) with individual characteristics, socio-economic status, and health risk factors were also estimated. Results showed that advanced age, higher number of chronic conditions, lower education, smoking and being an alcohol non-drinker were negatively and significantly associated with HUI3 scores for the community sample. Except for age, chronic conditions and being an alcohol non-drinker, none of these factors were significantly associated with HUI3 for the institutional sample. Moreover, the association between age and HUI3 was weaker for the institutional sample in comparison to the community sample. Implications are that, for those who are institutionalized, the usual determinants of health factors are less important. In conclusion, there appears to be important heterogeneity in determinants of health between persons living in the institution and community.

Frailty is associated with postoperative complications in older adults with medical problems.

We sought to test whether frailty may be predictive of operative risk in older adults with medical problems. One hundred and twenty-five patients at least 70 years of age had a previously developed frailty screen, the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS), administered at a pre-surgical clinic, prior to elective non-cardiac surgery. A blinded chart audit assessed for postoperative medical complications, length of stay and inability to be discharged home. The mean age of patients was 77 (range 70-92) and most (82%) underwent orthopedic procedures. Increasing frailty was associated with postoperative complications (p=0.02), increased length of hospitalization (p=0.004) and inability to be discharged home (p=0.01), independent of age. EFS scores of 3 or less were associated with a lower risk of having a complication (age-adjusted OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.80, likelihood ratio of 0.33) and a higher chance (80%) of being discharged home (p<0.02). EFS scores exceeding 7 were associated with increased complications (OR 5.02, 95% CI 1.55-16.25, likelihood ratio of 3.9) and a lower chance of being discharged home (40%, p<0.02). This study suggests that a frailty screen can refine risk estimates of postoperative complications in older adults undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery.