A Systematic Review of Frailty Scores Used in Heart Failure Patients.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a complex, multi-dimensional syndrome commonly observed in patients with heart failure (HF). The presence of frailty in patients living with HF is strongly associated with increased vulnerability to adverse events, including falls, hospitalisation, and increased mortality. Several scoring systems have been developed to assess the presence of frailty in patients with HF. These scoring systems vary in their complexity and applicability; however, they provide the physician with a more comprehensive understanding of the biological, functional, and psychosocial needs of these patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical applicability of frailty tools in HF patients and their prognostic value, specifically relating to outcomes such as mortality, readmissions, and clinical deterioration. METHODS: A literature search using six electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane and Web of Science) was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Key search Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms combined "Frailty" AND "Heart failure". Studies were included if they assessed frailty using systematically defined criteria in a HF population. The PRISMA guidelines were used to include all relevant articles based on titles and abstracts. Full text articles were screened based on abstract relevance. A systematic narrative review of the literature was conducted on the final list of full text articles. RESULTS: An initial search yielded 8,066 articles. Following the removal of duplicates, title, and abstract searches, the remaining 154 articles underwent full text review, with 31 articles accepted for final qualitative synthesis. The two most utilised frailty scores were the Fried Frailty Phenotype (n=10) and the Barthel Index (n=8). The frailty scores provide prognostic data on multiple outcomes including mortality, increased hospitalisation, and functional decline. CONCLUSION: At the present time there is no universally applied frailty measure in a HF population. Choice of frailty score should be guided by physician experience and clinical setting, as well as tailored to a patient's functional, biological, and psychosocial circumstances. A push to adopt a single universal scoring system may help to ensure that frailty is assessed in all patients who live with HF.

Piloting a new approach to the treatment of obesity using dexamphetamine.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is a clear need for a new approach to the treatment of obesity, which is inexpensive and is effective for establishing lifestyle change. We conducted a pilot study to evaluate whether dexamphetamine can be used safely, combined with diet and exercise, for treating obesity. Our ultimate aim is to develop a 6-month treatment program for establishing the lifestyle changes necessary for weight control, utilizing dexamphetamine for its psychotropic effect on motivation. We viewed the anorexigenic effect as an additional advantage for promoting initial weight loss. METHODS: Obese adults were treated with dexamphetamine for 6 months (maximum of 30 mg twice daily), diet, and exercise. Weight, electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, and blood pressure were monitored. RESULTS: Twelve out of 14 completed 6 months treatment. Weight loss by intention to treat was 10.6 kg (95% CI 5.8-15.5, p < 0.001). The mean weight gain in the 6 months after ceasing dexamphetamine was 4.5 kg (95% CI 1.9-7.2, p = 0.003), leaving a mean weight loss at 12 months from baseline of 7.0 kg (95% CI -13.4 to -0.6, p = 0.03). All reported favorable increases in energy and alertness. Dose-limiting symptoms were mood changes (2) and insomnia (2). None had drug craving on ceasing dexamphetamine, and there were no cardiac complications. Among the seven women, there was a significant correlation for those who lost most weight on treatment to have the least regain in the following 6 months (r = 0.88, p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Our treatment with dexamphetamine, diet, and exercise was well tolerated and effective for initial weight loss. Future research will focus on identifying baseline predictive variables associated with long-term weight control.

Diagnosis and treatment of noncardiac chest pain.

Chest pain is common: one in four of the population have an episode annually. Of those who present to hospital, nearly two-thirds have noncardiac chest pain. More than half of these cases might have gastroesophageal reflux disease. Opinion differs over what is the most appropriate application of current investigatory methods. Evidence suggests that, once cardiac disease is ruled unlikely, empiric use of a proton pump inhibitor is an option; if acid suppression fails, detailed investigations as clinically indicated can be considered. A range of esophageal investigations is available, including 24-hour or 48-hour esophageal pH testing and esophageal manometry, as well as provocative tests, but there is no consensus as to which methods are the most useful. Psychiatric evaluation is not routine, but psychiatric or psychological disorders are common. Musculoskeletal disorders are also common, but are frequently overlooked. It is possible to subject patients to a comprehensive set of investigations before empiric therapy, but recent studies have failed to demonstrate an improved outcome using this exhaustive approach. A new tactic is required, with less attention spent on absolute diagnostic accuracy and more emphasis on optimizing the long-term clinical outcome in patients with noncardiac chest pain. It is possible that the targeted use of multiple drug trials in a policy of 'therapy as investigation' might be a superior methodology.