Frailty and Other Factors Associated With Early Outcomes in Middle-to Older Age Trauma Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively investigate associations of frailty and other predictor variables with functional recovery and health outcomes in middle-aged and older patients with trauma. DESIGN: Single-center prospective cohort study. SETTING: Emergency department of Wan Fang Hospital in Taiwan. PARTICIPANTS: Trauma patients aged 45 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty was assessed with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Injury mechanisms, pre-existing diseases, and fracture locations were recorded at baseline. The primary outcome was functional recovery assessed using the Barthel Index (BI). Secondary outcomes were new care needs, unscheduled return visits, and falls 3 months postinjury. RESULTS: A total of 588 participants were included in the final analysis. For every one-point increase in the CFS, the multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (OR, 95% confidence interval [CI]) of failure to retain the preinjury BI was 1.34 (1.16-1.55); associations were consistent across levels of age and injury severities. Significant joint associations of frailty and age with poor functional recovery were observed. CFS was also associated with new care needs (OR for every one-point increase, 1.36, 95% CI, 1.17-1.58), unscheduled return visits (OR 1.26, 95% CI, 1.04-1.51), and falls (OR 1.23, 95% CI, 1.01-1.51). Other variables associated with failure to retain preinjury BI included road traffic accident and presence of hip fracture. CONCLUSION: Frailty was significantly associated with poor functional and health outcomes regardless of injury severity in middle-aged and older patients with trauma. Injury mechanisms and fracture locations were also significant predictors of functional recovery postinjury.

FRailty in Australian patients admitted to Intensive care unit after eLective CANCER-related SURGery: a retrospective multicentre cohort study (FRAIL-CANCER-SURG study).

BACKGROUND: The association between frailty and short-term and long-term outcomes in patients receiving elective surgery for cancer remains unclear, particularly in those admitted to the ICU. METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective cohort study, we included adults ≥16 yr old admitted to 158 ICUs in Australia from January 1, 2018 to March 31, 2022 after elective surgery for cancer. We investigated the association between frailty and survival time up to 4 yr (primary outcome), adjusting for a prespecified set of covariates. We analysed how this association changed in specific subgroups (age categories [<65, 65-80, ≥80 yr], and those who survived hospitalisation), and over time by splitting the survival information at monthly intervals. RESULTS: We included 35,848 patients (median follow-up: 18.1 months [inter-quartile range: 8.3-31.1 months], 19,979 [56.1%] male, median age 69.0 yr [inter-quartile range: 58.8-76.0 yr]). Some 3502 (9.8%) patients were frail (defined as clinical frailty scale ≥5). Frailty was associated with lower survival (hazard ratio: 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.59-1.86 compared with clinical frailty scale ≤4); this was concordant across several sensitivity analyses. Frailty was most strongly associated with mortality early on in follow-up, up to 10 months (hazard ratio: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.03-1.86), but this association plateaued, and its predictive capacity subsequently diminished with time up until 4 yr (1.96, 95% CI: 0.73-5.28). Frailty was associated with similar effects when stratified based on age, and in those who survived hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was associated with poorer outcomes after an ICU admission after elective surgery for cancer, particularly in the short term. However, its predictive capacity with time diminished, suggesting a potential need for longitudinal reassessment to ensure appropriate prognostication in this population.

Combined Prognostic Impact of Two Quick Frailty Assessments in Acute Heart Failure.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of frailty (defined by the Study of Osteoporotic Fracture [SOF] index and the Clinical Frailty Scale [CFS]) in hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF). METHODS: A total of 1,053 patients over 75 years of age, who were primarily admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of acute decompensated HF, were enrolled. The prognostic value of frailty by the two tools for predicting all-cause mortality was analyzed using multivariate Cox regression models. RESULTS: The incidence of frailty was 57.1% when using the SOF index, 37.6% when using the CFS, and 23.3% when using both tools. Frailty, via the SOF index or CFS, was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality in model 1, after adjustment for significantly associated factors by univariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.84, p = 0.027; HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.15-2.05, p = 0.003, respectively), and in model 2, after adjustment for previously reported prognostic factors (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.07-1.89, p = 0.015; HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.17-2.07, p = 0.002, respectively). Compared to non-frail patients, frail patients via both tools had a significantly higher incidence of all-cause mortality in models 1 (adjusted HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.42-3.29, p < 0.001) and 2 (adjusted HR 2.30, 95% CI 1.51-3.50, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Combined frailty screening using the SOF index and CFS contributed to stratify the risk of mortality in patients with acute decompensated HF.

Agreement between Clinical Frailty Scale-scores based on information from patient interviews and Clinical Frailty Scale-scores based on information from medical records - a cross sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is an age-related condition with increased risk for adverse health outcomes. Assessing frailty according to the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) based on data from medical records is useful for previously unassessed patients, but the validity of such scores in exclusively geriatric populations and in patients with dementia is relatively unknown. METHODS: Patients admitted for the first time to one of two geriatric wards at Örebro University hospital between January 1st - December 31st, 2021, were included in this study if they had been appointed a CFS-score by anamnestic interview (CFSI) at admission. CFS scores based on medical records (CFSR) were appointed by a single medical student, who was blinded to the CFSI score. Score-agreement was evaluated with quadratic weighted Cohen's kappa (κ). RESULTS: In total, 145 patients between the age of 55-101 were included in the study. The CFSR and CFSI scores agreed perfectly in 102 cases (0.7, 95% CI 0.65-0.77). There was no significant difference regarding age, sex, comorbidity, or number of patients diagnosed with dementia between the patients with complete agreement and the patients whose scores did not agree. Agreement between the scores was substantial, κ = 0.66, 95% CI 0.53-0.80. CONCLUSIONS: CFS scores based on information from medical records can be generated with substantial agreement to CFS scores based on in-person anamnestic interviews. A dementia diagnosis does not influence the agreement between the scores. Therefore, these scores are a useful tool for assessing frailty in geriatric patients who previously lack a frailty assessment, both in clinical practice and future research. The results support previous findings, but larger studies are warranted.

Long-term, patient-centered, frailty-based outcomes of older critical illness survivors from the emergency department: a post hoc analysis of the LIFE Study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates frailty before intensive care unit (ICU) admission leads to poor outcomes. However, it is unclear whether quality of life (QOL) and activities of daily living (ADL) for survivors of critical illness admitted to the ICU via the emergency department remain consistent or deteriorate in the long-term compared to baseline. This study aimed to evaluate long-term QOL/ADL outcomes in these patients, categorized by the presence or absence of frailty according to Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) score, as well as explore factors that influence these outcomes. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, observational study conducted across Japan. It included survivors aged 65 years or older who were admitted to the ICU through the emergency department. Based on CFS scores, participants were categorized into either the not frail group or the frail group, using a threshold CFS score of < 4. Our primary outcome was patient-centered outcomes (QOL/ADL) measured by the five-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and the Barthel Index six months post-ICU admission, comparing results from baseline. Secondary outcomes included exploration of factors associated with QOL/ADL six months post-ICU admission using multiple linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 514 candidates, 390 participants responded to the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, while 237 responded to the Barthel Index. At six months post-admission, mean EQ-5D-5L values declined in both the not frail and frail groups (0.80 to 0.73, p = 0.003 and 0.58 to 0.50, p = 0.002, respectively); Barthel Index scores also declined in both groups (98 to 83, p < 0.001 and 79 to 61, p < 0.001, respectively). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that baseline frailty (ß coefficient, -0.15; 95% CI, - 0.23 to - 0.07; p < 0.001) and pre-admission EQ-5D-5L scores (ß coefficient, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.26; p = 0.016) affected EQ-5D-5L scores at six months. Similarly, baseline frailty (ß coefficient, -12.3; 95% CI, - 23.9 to - 0.80; p = 0.036) and Barthel Index scores (ß coefficient, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.79; p < 0.001) influenced the Barthel Index score at six months. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of frailty, older ICU survivors from the emergency department were more likely to experience reduced QOL and ADL six months after ICU admission compared to baseline.

Reweighting and validation of the hospital frailty risk score using electronic health records in Germany: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: In the hospital setting, frailty is a significant risk factor, but difficult to measure in clinical practice. We propose a reweighting of an existing diagnoses-based frailty score using routine data from a tertiary care teaching hospital in southern Germany. METHODS: The dataset includes patient characteristics such as sex, age, primary and secondary diagnoses and in-hospital mortality. Based on this information, we recalculate the existing Hospital Frailty Risk Score. The cohort includes patients aged ≥ 75 and was divided into a development cohort (admission year 2011 to 2013, N = 30,525) and a validation cohort (2014, N = 11,202). A limited external validation is also conducted in a second validation cohort containing inpatient cases aged ≥ 75 in 2022 throughout Germany (N = 491,251). In the development cohort, LASSO regression analysis was used to select the most relevant variables and to generate a reweighted Frailty Score for the German setting. Discrimination is assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Visualization of calibration curves and decision curve analysis were carried out. Applicability of the reweighted Frailty Score in a non-elderly population was assessed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Reweighting of the Frailty Score included only 53 out of the 109 frailty-related diagnoses and resulted in substantially better discrimination than the initial weighting of the score (AUC = 0.89 vs. AUC = 0.80, p < 0.001 in the validation cohort). Calibration curves show a good agreement between score-based predictions and actual observed mortality. Additional external validation using inpatient cases aged ≥ 75 in 2022 throughout Germany (N = 491,251) confirms the results regarding discrimination and calibration and underlines the geographic and temporal validity of the reweighted Frailty Score. Decision curve analysis indicates that the clinical usefulness of the reweighted score as a general decision support tool is superior to the initial version of the score. Assessment of the applicability of the reweighted Frailty Score in a non-elderly population (N = 198,819) shows that discrimination is superior to the initial version of the score (AUC = 0.92 vs. AUC = 0.87, p < 0.001). In addition, we observe a fairly age-stable influence of the reweighted Frailty Score on in-hospital mortality, which does not differ substantially for women and men. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the reweighted Frailty Score is superior to the original Frailty Score for identification of older, frail patients at risk for in-hospital mortality. Hence, we recommend using the reweighted Frailty Score in the German in-hospital setting.

Effects of Clinical Frailty Scale Score on Adverse Outcomes and Length of Emergency Department Stay Before Intensive Care Unit Admission.

BACKGROUND: Older adults living with frailty who require treatment in hospitals are increasingly seen in emergency departments (EDs). OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effects of frailty severity according to the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) on adverse outcomes and length of stay in the ED before intensive care unit (ICU) admission. METHODS: We conducted this prospective observational study with patients 65 years or older and admitted to the ICU from March 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022. We divided the patients into four groups according to their CFS scores. We determined the effects of frailty severity on length of ED stay and clinical outcomes using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 920 patients included in the study, 25.4% were nonfrail, 26.2% had mild frailty, 25.9% had moderate frailty, and 22.5% had severe frailty. In the regression analysis, compared with those who were nonfrail, the length of ED stay was significantly longer for those with moderate frailty (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.63-2.90) or severe frailty (OR 3.32; 95% CI 1.92-3.87), but the result was not significant for those with mild frailty (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.21-2.45). ICU mortality was significantly higher among patients with mild, moderate, or severe frailty than among those who were nonfrail. CONCLUSIONS: We found CFS score to be a predictor of length of ED stay and adverse outcomes. Accordingly, CFS evaluation can provide an idea of the length of ED stay and the likelihood of adverse outcomes.

Were Frailty Identification Criteria Created Equal? A Comparative Case Study on Continuous Non-Invasively Collected Neurocardiovascular Signals during an Active Standing Test in the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA).

BACKGROUND: In this observational study, we compared continuous physiological signals during an active standing test in adults aged 50 years and over, characterised as frail by three different criteria, using data from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA). METHODS: This study utilised data from TILDA, an ongoing landmark prospective cohort study of community-dwelling adults aged 50 years or older in Ireland. The initial sampling strategy in TILDA was based on random geodirectory sampling. Four independent groups were identified: those characterised as frail only by one of the frailty tools used (the physical Frailty Phenotype (FP), the 32-item Frailty Index (FI), or the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) classification tree), and a fourth group where participants were not characterised as frail by any of these tools. Continuous non-invasive physiological signals were collected during an active standing test, including systolic (sBP) and diastolic (dBP) blood pressure, as well as heart rate (HR), using digital artery photoplethysmography. Additionally, the frontal lobe cerebral oxygenation (Oxy), deoxygenation (Deoxy), and tissue saturation index (TSI) were also non-invasively measured using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). The signals were visualised across frailty groups and statistically compared using one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping (SPM). RESULTS: A total of 1124 participants (mean age of 63.5 years; 50.2% women) were included: 23 were characterised as frail only by the FP, 97 by the FI, 38 by the CFS, and 966 by none of these criteria. The SPM analyses revealed that only the group characterised as frail by the FI had significantly different signals (p < 0.001) compared to the non-frail group. Specifically, they exhibited an attenuated gain in HR between 10 and 15 s post-stand and larger deficits in sBP and dBP between 15 and 20 s post-stand. CONCLUSIONS: The FI proved to be more adept at capturing distinct physiological responses to standing, likely due to its direct inclusion of cardiovascular morbidities in its definition. Significant differences were observed in the dynamics of cardiovascular signals among the frail populations identified by different frailty criteria, suggesting that caution should be taken when employing frailty identification tools on physiological signals, particularly the neurocardiovascular signals in an active standing test.

Frailty as a trigger for goals-of-care discussions in rapid response calls: A single-centre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Timely goals-of-care (GOC) discussions are essential for end-of-life planning, particularly during acute hospital admissions, where ambiguity often persists. Frailty, prevalent in the ageing population and linked to adverse outcomes, underscores the need to align treatment strategies with quality of life. Recognising frailty as a trigger for GOC discussions during rapid response calls (RRCs) is critical for efficient resource management and improving patient outcomes. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective cohort study included all hospitalised patients aged ≥65 years admitted between September 2021 and June 2023 who experienced an RRC. Frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) during the RRC. The primary outcome was to investigate whether frailty, specifically assessed by the CFS as screened during an RRC, could be a suitable clinical trigger for initiating GOC discussions. We also aimed to identify the proportion of patients with frailty (CFS score: ≥5) and predictors at the time of RRC, resulting in recommendations for GOC discussions. RESULTS: Among 4954 patients, 1685 (34.0%) were classified as frail (CFS score: ≥5). Recommendations increased with frailty levels (nonfrail [CFS score: 1-4]: 6.6%, mildly frail [CFS score: 5]: 19.3%, moderate-to-severely frail [CFS score: 6-9]: 32.2%; p < 0.001). Frailty independently increased the probability of GOC recommendations during an RRC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.71). The CFS cut-off point for GOC recommendations was ≥5. The presence of frailty was associated with higher odds of receiving GOC recommendations for mildly frail (CFS score: 5; odds ratio [OR] = 2.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.96-3.27) and moderate-to-severely frail (CFS score: 6-9; OR = 4.69; 95% confidence interval: 3.81-5.78) compared to nonfrail patients. CONCLUSION: Frailty, identified during an RRC, served as a robust trigger for GOC recommendations, highlighting the importance of tailored proactive discussions before episodes of deterioration. Higher levels of frailty (CFS score: ≥5) demonstrate practical markers for aiding clinicians with proactive GOC discussions.

Frailty predicts mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Evidence on the impact of frailty in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB) is limited. This study aims to define the role of frailty as defined by Canadian Study of Health and Aging clinical frailty scale (CSHA-CFS) in predicting mortality in UGIB. METHODS: A prospective single-center cohort study was conducted over 21 months on all consecutive patients with UGIB. Data on demographics, lab parameters, Glasgow Blatchford score, CSHA-CFS, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and AIMS65 score was recorded. The primary outcome was all-cause inpatient mortality. The secondary outcomes were all-cause 30-day mortality, 30-day rebleeding, 30-day readmission, hospital length of stay (LoS), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for repeat endoscopy, and need for blood transfusion. The data were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were 298 eligible patients, of which 63% were males, median age was 68 years, 44% were from non-English-speaking background, and 72% had major comorbidities. The all-cause inpatient and 30-day mortality were 9.4% and 10.7%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, CHSA-CFS was the independent predictor of all-cause inpatient mortality (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.13-2.143; P = 0.010) and all-cause 30-day mortality (OR 1.83; 95% CI 1.26-2.67; P = 0.002). CHSA-CFS was not a significant predictor of 30-day rebleed, 30-day readmission, ICU admission, hospital LoS, or need for blood transfusion. CONCLUSION: Frailty is an important independent predictor of mortality in patients with UGIB. Frailty assessment can guide clinical decision making and allow targeting of health-care resource (Australia/New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry number: ACTRN12622000821796).

Frailty prevalence and efficient screening in primary care-based memory clinics.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the prevalence of frailty among patients with memory concerns attending a primary care-based memory clinic. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the prevalence of frailty among patients attending a primary care-based memory clinic and to determine if prevalence rates differ based on the screening tool that is used. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical record review for all consecutive patients assessed in a primary care-based memory clinic over 8 months. Frailty was measured in 258 patients using the Fried frailty criteria, which relies on physical measures, and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), which relies on functional status. Weighted kappa statistics were calculated to compare the Fried frailty and the CFS. RESULTS: The prevalence of frailty was 16% by Fried criteria and 48% by the CFS. Agreement between Fried frailty and CFS was fair for CFS 5+ (kappa = 0.22; 95% confidence interval: 0.13, 0.32) and moderate for CFS 6+ (kappa = 0.47; 0.34, 0.61). Dual-trait measures of hand grip strength with gait speed were found to be a valid proxy for Fried frailty phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: Among primary care patients with memory concerns, frailty prevalence rates differed based on the measure used. Screening for frailty in this population using measures relying on physical performance may be a more efficient approach for persons already at risk of further health instability from cognitive impairment. Our findings demonstrate how measure selection should be based on the objectives and context in which frailty screening occurs.

There is some evidence that frailty and dementia are inter-related. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of frailty among patients attending a primary care-based memory clinic using 2 commonly used frailty measures: the Fried frailty phenotype criteria and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Frailty prevalence in patients with memory concerns is at least double that of regular primary care practice; prevalence is 16% when the Fried frailty phenotype is used, which incorporates physical frailty measures, as compared with prevalence of 48% when the more function-based measure of CFS is used. Screening tools should be selected considering the objectives and context in which they are used. Within primary care-based memory clinics, physical frailty measures may be most optimal. Using hand grip and gait speed screening as a valid proxy for Fried frailty phenotype offers a feasible and practical way of identifying frailty relating more to physical underlying conditions. Based on our study findings, frailty screening within primary care-based memory clinics is justified for patients 65 years+; early identification and intervention may prevent further decline and adverse outcomes. Further research in this area will increase our understanding of frailty and dementia in this context and how to best plan care.

Combined assessment of frailty and nutritional status can be a prognostic indicator after percutaneous coronary intervention.

The cardiac prognosis of patients with frailty and malnutrition remains poorly investigated. This study aimed to investigate the impact of frailty and malnutrition on cardiac prognosis by combining the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this study, 608 patients who underwent PCI for stable angina pectoris between January 2018 and December 2020 were included. CFS scores of ≥ 4 were defined as high CFS and patients with these scores were considered frail. GNRI scores of ≤ 98.0 were defined as low GNRI and patients with these scores were considered to have malnutrition. Patients were categorized into low-risk (n = 267, low CFS and high GNRI), intermediate-risk (n = 200, high CFS or low GNRI), and high-risk (n = 141, high CFS and low GNRI) groups. Major adverse clinical events (MACEs), including all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, revascularization, hospitalization for heart failure, and stroke, were assessed. The median follow-up period was 529 days. During the follow-up, MACEs were found in 135 patients. The high-risk group were older (77.0 ± 9.2 vs 71.4 ± 10.7 vs 65.0 ± 10.1 years, p < 0.001), had higher prevalence rates of chronic kidney disease [61.7% (87/141) vs 37.5% (75/200) vs 16.9% (45/267); p < 0.001] and heart failure [47.5% (67/141) vs 22.5% (45/200) vs 12.4% (33/267), p < 0.001], and had higher C-reactive protein levels (1.64 ± 2.66 vs 1.00 ± 2.02 vs 0.34 ± 0.90 mg/dL; p < 0.001) than the intermediate-risk and low-risk groups. The high-risk group [hazard ratio (HR), 4.39; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.87-6.72; p < 0.001] was an independent predictor of MACEs. In conclusion, patients with both frailty and malnutrition had a higher risk of MACEs after PCI than patients with frailty or malnutrition. Post-PCI patients should be evaluated for combined frailty and malnutrition.

Association of preoperative clinical frailty and clinical outcomes in elderly patients with stable coronary artery disease after percutaneous coronary intervention.

There are few reports on the long-term clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) complicated with frailty. This novel study investigated the association between pre-PCI frailty and long-term clinical outcomes in elderly patients aged 65 years or older with stable CAD who underwent elective PCI. We assessed 239 consecutive patients aged 65 years or older with stable CAD who underwent successful elective PCI at Kagoshima City Hospital between January 1st, 2017 and December 31st, 2020. Frailty was retrospectively assessed using the Canadian Study and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Based on the pre-PCI CFS, patients were divided into two groups: the non-frail (CFS < 5) and the frail (CFS ≥ 5) group. We investigated the association between pre-PCI CFS and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, and heart failure requiring hospitalization. Additionally, we assessed the association between pre-PCI CFS and major bleeding events defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding. The mean age was 74.8 ± 7.0 years, and 73.6% were men. According to the pre-PCI frailty assessment, 38 (15.9%) and 201 (84.1%) were classified as frail and non-frail groups, respectively. During a median follow-up of 962 (607-1284) days, 46 patients developed MACEs and 10 patients developed major bleeding events. Kaplan-Meier curves showed a significantly higher incidence of MACE in the frail group compared to those in the non-frail group (Log-rank p < 0.001). Even in multivariate analysis, pre-PCI frailty (CFS ≥ 5) was independently associated with MACE (HR 4.27, 95% CI 1.86-9.80, p-value: < 0.001). Additionally, the cumulative incidence of major bleeding events was significantly higher in the frail group than in the non-frail group (Log-rank p = 0.001). Pre-PCI frailty was an independent risk factor for MACE and bleeding events in elderly patients with stable CAD who underwent elective PCI.

Integrating the clinical frailty scale with emergency department triage systems for elder patients: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: This prospective study investigated whether integrating the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) with a triage system would improve triage for older adult emergency department (ED) patients. METHODS: We enrolled ED patients aged 65 years or older at 5 study sites in Taiwan between December 2020 and April 2021. All eligible patients were assigned a triage level by using the Taiwan Triage and Acuity Scale (TTAS) in accordance with usual practice. A CFS score was collected from them. The primary outcome was critical events, defined as ICU admission or in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were ED medical expenditures, number of orders in the ED, and length of hospital stay (LOS). We applied a reclassification concept and integrated the CFS and TTAS to create the Triage Frailty Acuity Scale (TFAS). We compared the outcomes achieved between the TTAS and TFAS. RESULTS: Of 1023 screened ED patients, 890 were enrolled. The majority were assigned to TTAS level 3 (73.26%) and had CFS scores of 4 to 9 (55.96%). The primary outcomes were better predicted by the TFAS than the TTAS (area under the curve [AUC] 0.82 vs. 064). Using multivariable approach, TTAS level 1 (odds ratio [OR], 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-13.4) and CFS score (OR, 5.8; 95% CI, 1.9-17.2) were significantly associated with the primary outcomes. For older adults at the highest triage level, the TFAS was not associated with an increase in the primary outcomes compared with the TTAS; however, the TFAS was associated with a significant decrease in the number of older ED patients assigned to triage levels 3 to 5. In addition, TFAS had a longer average LOS but did not have a higher average number of orders or ED medical expenditures compared to TTAS. CONCLUSIONS: The TFAS identified more older ED patients who had been triaged as less emergent but proceeded to need ICU admission or in-hospital death. Incorporating the CFS into triage may reduce the under-triage of older adults in the ED.

Cross-cultural adaption and inter-rater reliability of the Swedish version of the updated clinical frailty scale 2.0.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, there is a large and growing group of older adults. Frailty is known as an important discriminatory factor for poor outcomes. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) has become a frequently used frailty instrument in different clinical settings and health care sectors, and it has shown good predictive validity. The aims of this study were to describe and validate the translation and cultural adaptation of the CFS into Swedish (CFS-SWE), and to test the inter-rater reliability (IRR) for registered nurses using the CFS-SWE. METHODS: An observational study design was employed. The ISPOR principles were used for the translation, linguistic validation and cultural adaptation of the scale. To test the IRR, 12 participants were asked to rate 10 clinical case vignettes using the CFS-SWE. The IRR was assessed using intraclass correlation and Krippendorff's alpha agreement coefficient test. RESULTS: The Clinical Frailty Scale was translated and culturally adapted into Swedish and is presented in its final form. The IRR for all raters, measured by an intraclass correlation test, resulted in an absolute agreement value among the raters of 0.969 (95% CI: 0.929-0.991) and a consistency value of 0.979 (95% CI: 0.953-0.994), which indicates excellent reliability. Krippendorff's alpha agreement coefficient for all raters was 0.969 (95% CI: 0.917-0.988), indicating near-perfect agreement. The sensitivity of the reliability was examined by separately testing the IRR of the group of specialised registered nurses and non-specialised registered nurses respectively, with consistent and similar results. CONCLUSION: The Clinical Frailty Scale was translated, linguistically validated and culturally adapted into Swedish following a well-established standard technique. The IRR was excellent, judged by two established, separately used, reliability tests. The reliability test results did not differ between non-specialised and specialised registered nurses. However, the use of case vignettes might reduce the generalisability of the reliability findings to real-life settings. The CFS has the potential to be a common reference tool, especially when older adults are treated and rehabilitated in different care sectors.

Prediction of adverse health outcomes using an electronic frailty index among nonfrail and prefrail community elders.

BACKGROUND: Early recognition of older people at risk of undesirable clinical outcomes is vital in preventing future disabling conditions. Here, we report the prognostic performance of an electronic frailty index (eFI) in comparison with traditional tools among nonfrail and prefrail community-dwelling older adults. The study is to investigate the predictive utility of a deficit-accumulation eFI in community elders without overt frailty. METHODS: Participants aged 65-80 years with a Clinical Frailty Scale of 1-3 points were recruited and followed for 2 years. The eFI score and Fried's frailty scale were determined by using a semiautomated platform of self-reported questionnaires and objective measurements which yielded cumulative deficits and physical phenotypes from 80 items of risk variables. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to analyze the severity of frailty in relation to adverse outcomes of falls, emergency room (ER) visits and hospitalizations during 2 years' follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 427 older adults were evaluated and dichotomized by the median FI score. Two hundred and sixty (60.9%) and 167 (39.1%) elders were stratified into the low- (eFI ≤ 0.075) and the high-risk (eFI > 0.075) groups, respectively. During the follow-up, 77 (47.0%) individuals developed adverse events in the high-risk group, compared with 79 (30.5%) in the low-risk group (x2, p = 0.0006). In multivariable models adjusted for age and sex, the increased risk of all three events combined in the high- vs. low-risk group remained significant (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 3.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.87-5.07). For individual adverse event, the aHRs were 2.20 (CI: 1.44-3.36) for falls; 1.67 (CI: 1.03-2.70) for ER visits; and 2.84 (CI: 1.73-4.67) for hospitalizations. Compared with the traditional tools, the eFI stratification (high- vs. low-risk) showed better predictive performance than either CFS rating (managing well vs. fit to very fit; not discriminative in hospitalizations) or Fried's scale (prefrail to frail vs. nonfrail; not discriminative in ER visits). CONCLUSION: The eFI system is a useful frailty tool which effectively predicts the risk of adverse healthcare outcomes in nonfrail and/or prefrail older adults over a period of 2 years.

A clinical frailty scale obtained from MDT discussion performs poorly in assessing frailty in haemodialysis recipients.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a commonly utilised frailty screening tool that has been associated with hospitalisation and mortality in haemodialysis recipients, but is subject to heterogenous methodologies including subjective clinician opinion. The aims of this study were to (i) examine the accuracy of a subjective, multidisciplinary assessment of CFS at haemodialysis Quality Assurance (QA) meetings (CFS-MDT), compared with a standard CFS score via clinical interview, and (ii) ascertain the associations of these scores with hospitalisation and mortality. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of prevalent haemodialysis recipients linked to national datasets for outcomes including mortality and hospitalisation. Frailty was assessed using the CFS after structured clinical interview. The CFS-MDT was derived from consensus at haemodialysis QA meetings, involving dialysis nurses, dietitians, and nephrologists. RESULTS: 453 participants were followed-up for a median of 685 days (IQR 544-812), during which there were 96 (21.2%) deaths and 1136 hospitalisations shared between 327 (72.1%) participants. Frailty was identified in 246 (54.3%) participants via CFS, but only 120 (26.5%) via CFS-MDT. There was weak correlation (Spearman Rho 0.485, P < 0.001) on raw frailty scores and minimal agreement (Cohen's κ = 0.274, P < 0.001) on categorisation of frail, vulnerable and robust between the CFS and CFS-MDT. Increasing frailty was associated with higher rates of hospitalisation for the CFS (IRR 1.26, 95% C.I. 1.17-1.36, P = 0.016) and CFS-MDT (IRR 1.10, 1.02-1.19, P = 0.02), but only the CFS-MDT was associated with nights spent in hospital (IRR 1.22, 95% C.I. 1.08-1.38, P = 0.001). Both scores were associated with mortality (CFS HR 1.31, 95% C.I. 1.09-1.57, P = 0.004; CFS-MDT HR 1.36, 95% C.I. 1.16-1.59, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of CFS is deeply affected by the underlying methodology, with the potential to profoundly affect decision-making. The CFS-MDT appears to be a weak alternative to conventional CFS. Standardisation of CFS use is of paramount importance in clinical and research practice in haemodialysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT03071107 registered 06/03/2017.

Combined use of the Clinical Frailty Scale and laboratory tests in acutely hospitalized older patients.

AIMS: To evaluate the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and a Frailty Index based on laboratory tests (FI-lab) in terms of what each assesses about frailty and to determine the appropriateness of combined use of these two frailty scales. METHODS: This was a prospective observational cohort study in an acute geriatric ward of a university hospital. The FI-lab is the proportion of laboratory parameters that yield abnormal results from a total of 23. The FI-lab and CFS were assessed at admission. Data on activities of daily living (ADL), cognition, geriatric syndromes, and comorbidities were also collected. Main outcomes were in-hospital mortality and 90-day mortality after admission. RESULTS: In total, 378 inpatients (mean age 85.2 ± 5.8 years, 59.3% female) were enrolled. ADL and cognition correlated strongly with the CFS (Spearman's |r|> 0.60) but weakly with the FI-lab (|r|< 0.30). Both the CFS and FI-lab correlated weakly with geriatric syndromes and comorbidities (|r|< 0.40). The correlation between the CFS and FI-lab was also weak (r = 0.28). The CFS and FI-lab were independently associated with in-hospital mortality and 90-day mortality after admission. The Akaike information criterion was lower for models using both the CFS and FI-lab than for models using either tool alone. CONCLUSIONS: The CFS and FI-lab each reflected only some of the aspects of frailty in acutely hospitalized older patients. The model fit was better when the two frailty scales were used together to assess the mortality risk than when either was used alone.

Clinical Frailty Scale is a better predictor for adverse post-operative complications and functional outcomes than Modified Frailty Index and Charlson Comorbidity Index after total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Studies have demonstrated correlations between frailty and comorbidity scores with adverse outcomes in total knee replacement (TKR). However, there is a lack of consensus on the most suitable pre-operative assessment tool. This study aims to compare Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Modified Frailty Index (MFI), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) in predicting adverse post-operative complications and functional outcomes following a unilateral TKR. METHODS: In total, 811 unilateral TKR patients from a tertiary hospital were identified. Pre-operative variables were age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, CFS, MFI, and CCI. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to ascertain odd ratios of pre-operative variables on adverse post-operative complications (length of stay < LOS >, complications, ICU/HD admission, discharge location, 30-day readmission, 2-year reoperation). Multiple linear regression analyses were used to estimate the standardized effects of pre-operative variables on the Knee Society Functional Score (KSFS), Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: CFS is a strong predictor for LOS (OR 1.876, p < 0.001), complications (OR 1.83-4.97, p < 0.05), discharge location (OR 1.84, p < 0.001), and 2-year reoperation rate (OR 1.98, p < .001). ASA and MFI were predictors for ICU/HD admission (OR:4.04, p = 0.002; OR 1.58, p = 0.022, respectively). None of the scores was predictive for 30-day readmission. A higher CFS was associated with a worse outcome for 6-month KSS, 2-year KSS, 6-month OKS, 2-year OKS, and 6-month SF-36. CONCLUSION: CFS is a superior predictor for post-operative complications and functional outcomes than MFI and CCI in unilateral TKR patients. This suggests the importance of assessing pre-operative functional status when planning for TKR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, II.

Investigation of frailty markers including a novel biomarker panel in emergency laparotomy: protocol of a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy (EmLAP) is one of the commonest emergency operations performed in the United Kingdom (approximately 30, 000 laparotomies annually). These potentially high-risk procedures can be life changing with frail patients and/ or older adults (≥ 65 years) having the poorest outcomes, including mortality. There is no gold standard of frailty assessment and no clinical chemical biomarkers existing in practice. Early detection of subclinical changes or deficits at the molecular level are essential in improving our understanding of the biology of frailty and ultimately improving patient outcomes. This study aims primarily to compare preoperative frailty markers, including a blood-based biomarker panel, in their ability to predict 30 and 90-day mortality post-EmLAP. The secondary aim is to analyse the influence of perioperative frailty on morbidity and quality of life post-EmLAP. METHODS: A prospective single centred observational study will be conducted on 150 patients ≥ 40 years of age that undergo EmLAP. Patients will be included according to the established NELA (National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) criteria. The variables collected include demographics, co-morbidities, polypharmacy, place of residence, indication and type of surgery (as per NELA criteria) and prognostic NELA score. Frailty will be assessed using: a blood sample for ultra-high performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry analysis; preoperative CT abdomen pelvis (sarcopenia) and Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Patients will be followed up for 90 days. Variables collected include blood samples (at post operative day 1, 7, 30 and 90), place of residence on discharge, morbidity, mortality and quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L). The frailty markers will be compared between groups of frail (CFS ≥ 4) and non-frail using statistical methods such as regression model and adjusted for appropriate confounding factors. DISCUSSION: This study hypothesises that frailty level changes following EmLAP in frail and non- frail patients, irrespective of age. We propose that non- frail patients will have better survival rates and report better quality of life compared to the frail. By studying the changes in metabolites/ biomarkers in these patients and correlate them to frailty status pre-surgery, this highly novel approach will develop new knowledge of frailty and define a new area of clinical biomolecular research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05416047. Registered on 13/06/2022 (retrospectively registered).