The state of health in the European Union (EU-27) in 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study 2019.

BACKGROUND: The European Union (EU) faces many health-related challenges. Burden of diseases information and the resulting trends over time are essential for health planning. This paper reports estimates of disease burden in the EU and individual 27 EU countries in 2019, and compares them with those in 2010. METHODS: We used the Global Burden of Disease 2019 study estimates and 95% uncertainty intervals for the whole EU and each country to evaluate age-standardised death, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) rates for Level 2 causes, as well as life expectancy and healthy life expectancy (HALE). RESULTS: In 2019, the age-standardised death and DALY rates in the EU were 465.8 deaths and 20,251.0 DALYs per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively. Between 2010 and 2019, there were significant decreases in age-standardised death and YLL rates across EU countries. However, YLD rates remained mainly unchanged. The largest decreases in age-standardised DALY rates were observed for "HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases" and "transport injuries" (each -19%). "Diabetes and kidney diseases" showed a significant increase for age-standardised DALY rates across the EU (3.5%). In addition, "mental disorders" showed an increasing age-standardised YLL rate (14.5%). CONCLUSIONS: There was a clear trend towards improvement in the overall health status of the EU but with differences between countries. EU health policymakers need to address the burden of diseases, paying specific attention to causes such as mental disorders. There are many opportunities for mutual learning among otherwise similar countries with different patterns of disease.

Frailty in an Adult Acute Hospital Population: Predictors, Prevalence, and Outcomes.

Frailty is common among older hospital inpatients. While studies describe frailty prevalence in acute hospitals, it is usually based upon retrospective hospital-coded data or brief screening on admission rather than comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). Further, little is known about differences between pre-admission and current frailty status. Given this, we investigated the prevalence of pre-frailty and frailty among adult inpatients in a large university hospital after CGA. Of the 410 inpatients available, 398 were included in the study, with a median age of 70 years; 56% were male. The median length of stay (LOS) at review was 8 days. The point prevalence of frailty was 30% versus 14% for pre-frailty. The median Clinical Frailty Scale score pre-admission was 3/9, which was significantly lower than at review, which was 4/9 (p < 0.001). After adjusting for age and sex, frailty was associated with greater odds of prolonged LOS (odds ratio [OR] 1.7, p = 0.045), one-year mortality (OR 2.1, p = 0.006), and one-year institutionalisation (OR 9, p < 0.001) but not re-admission. Frailty was most prevalent on medical and orthopaedic wards. In conclusion, CGA is an important risk assessment for hospitalised patients. Frailty was highly prevalent and associated with poor healthcare outcomes. Frailty status appears to worsen significantly during admission, likely reflecting acute illness, and it may not reflect a patient's true frailty level. The development of frailty clinical care pathways is recommended in order to address the poor prognosis associated with a diagnosis of frailty in this setting.

Impact of Frailty on Healthcare Outcomes after Cardioembolic Ischaemic Stroke Due to Atrial Fibrillation.

Stroke due to atrial fibrillation (AF) is more common in older adults. Frailty is associated with AF. As little is known about the impact of frailty on cardioembolic stroke, we examined its association with important healthcare outcomes including mortality and functional outcome in stroke with AF. Data were collected from patients presenting consecutively to a regional university hospital to assess pre-admission frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and function with the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Stroke severity was assessed on the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). In total, 113 patients presenting between August 2014 and July 2016 were identified with cardioembolic stroke, median age 80 years; 60% were male. Their median NIHSS score was 6. The median pre-admission CFS score was 3; 26.5% scored ≥5/9, indicating frailty. The median pre-admission mRS scores increased significantly from 1 to 3 at discharge (p < 0.001). Frailty was associated with worse mRS scores at discharge, odds ratio 1.5, (p = 0.03). While no patients with frailty were suitable to avail of early supported discharge, 10% of those without frailty were (p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality. Frailty is prevalent among patients with cardioembolic stroke due to AF and was associated with poorer functional outcomes. Although the numbers were small, these data suggest that brief frailty assessments are useful to risk-stratify patients with acute cardioembolic stroke. Frailty status on admission with stroke due to AF can help identify those more likely to have poorer outcomes, to benefit from intervention, to require prolonged rehabilitation, and to avail of ESD.

Hypertension and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Understanding the Complexities of the Relationship in Understudied Populations.

The association between hypertension and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is complex. Both are increasing in prevalence worldwide and will have disproportionate effects on lower income countries across Latin America. Despite this, there is insufficient evidence investigating this relationship in this region or those of Hispanic or Latino ancestry in higher income countries. In this context, the Study of Latinos-Investigation of Neurocognitive Aging represents a unique dataset. Although more research is required, Márquez and colleagues show that hypertension in this population in the United States is associated with decline in cognitive measures and greater odds of MCI over seven years follow-up.

Core requirements of frailty screening in the emergency department: an international Delphi consensus study.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes among patients attending emergency departments (EDs). While multiple frailty screens are available, little is known about which variables are important to incorporate and how best to facilitate accurate, yet prompt ED screening. To understand the core requirements of frailty screening in ED, we conducted an international, modified, electronic two-round Delphi consensus study. METHODS: A two-round electronic Delphi involving 37 participants from 10 countries was undertaken. Statements were generated from a prior systematic review examining frailty screening instruments in ED (logistic, psychometric and clinimetric properties). Reflexive thematic analysis generated a list of 56 statements for Round 1 (August-September 2021). Four main themes identified were: (i) principles of frailty screening, (ii) practicalities and logistics, (iii) frailty domains and (iv) frailty risk factors. RESULTS: In Round 1, 13/56 statements (23%) were accepted. Following feedback, 22 new statements were created and 35 were re-circulated in Round 2 (October 2021). Of these, 19 (54%) were finally accepted. It was agreed that ideal frailty screens should be short (<5 min), multidimensional and well-calibrated across the spectrum of frailty, reflecting baseline status 2-4 weeks before presentation. Screening should ideally be routine, prompt (<4 h after arrival) and completed at first contact in ED. Functional ability, mobility, cognition, medication use and social factors were identified as the most important variables to include. CONCLUSIONS: Although a clear consensus was reached on important requirements of frailty screening in ED, and variables to include in an ideal screen, more research is required to operationalise screening in clinical practice.

Frailty Knowledge, Use of Screening Tools, and Educational Challenges in Emergency Departments in Ireland: A Multisite Survey.

BACKGROUND: Recognizing frailty and providing evidenced-based management in busy emergency departments is challenging. Understanding the knowledge and educational needs of ED staff is important to design training that might improve patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore frailty knowledge of ED staff, use of frailty screening instruments in Irish emergency departments, and educational challenges in the emergency department. METHODS: A multisite survey of ED staff (different specialties) was conducted between April and September 2021. An anonymous online survey was distributed via email. Free-text sections were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: In total, 168 staff (nursing, medical and allied health) participated, representing 9 of 26 Irish emergency departments (35%). Most respondents were nurses (n = 78, 46%). Less than half of respondents had received frailty identification training (n = 81, 48%). One-fifth of emergency doctors and nurses (20%) were unsure how to define frailty. Major barriers to ED frailty screening were resource deficits, insufficient diagnostic pathways from the emergency departments, and lack of education on suitable instruments. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the ED staff surveyed relied on clinical judgment rather than formal training in frailty identification. A high proportion reported poor knowledge and low confidence in recognizing frailty. Dedicated staff with frailty management expertise, bespoke education initiatives, and clearly defined frailty screening pathways may help address the issues identified.

Comparison of the Clinical Effectiveness of Correcting Different Types of Astigmatism with Small Incision Lenticule Extraction.

Few studies have reported the differential outcomes of Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE) on myopic astigmatism. Given this, we examined the effectiveness of SMILE for up to one year, comparing with-the-rule (WTR), against-the-rule (ATR), and oblique astigmatism, conducting a retrospective review of patients who underwent correction of myopic astigmatism using the 500-kHz VisuMax femtosecond laser (Carl Zeiss Meditec) at two refractive clinics in Poland between 2016-2017. Patients were aged ≥21 with stable refractive errors between -0.5 and -10.0 diopter (D) with astigmatism up to 5D. The mean age of the 209 patients (355 eyes) available was 32 years; 58.4% were female. Of these, 247 had WTR, 62 oblique, and 46 ATR astigmatism. The mean pre-operative spherical equivalent (SE) was -5.4 ± 2.57D and the cylinder -1.7 ± 1.0D. The mean SE for WTR reduced from -5.60 ± 2.37D to -0.31 ± 0.67D at 2 months and -0.38 ± 0.70D at 12 months; the mean cylinder improved from -1.90 ± 1.10D to -0.31 ± 0.39D and -0.36 ± 0.43D, respectively. Eyes with oblique astigmatism also improved from a mean SE of -5.8 ± 3.4 D to -0.82 ± 1.50D and -0.69 ± 1.15D and a cylinder of -1.4 ± 0.73D to -0.17 ± 0.33D at 2 months and -0.1 ± 0.32D at 12. For ATR, the mean SE improved from -4.0 ± 1.8D to -0.08 ± 0.22D and -0.04 ± 0.12D; and the mean cylinder from -1.25 ± 0.53 to -0.02 ± 0.09D -0.08 ± 0.21D at 2 and 12 months, respectively. There were statistically significant improvements in SE, manifest sphere and cylinder refraction, and UDVA and CDVA scores for each cylinder type at 2 months with ATR cylinders having better outcomes. Although missing data limited interpretation at one year, differences were maintained. The magnitude of error calculations suggests that WTR was more prone to under-correction, particularly for high astigmatism (>1.5D). SMILE for myopic astigmatism reliably corrects SE, irrespective of the subtype of astigmatism.

Comparing frailty prevalence between countries: validation of the Global Burden of Disease study Frailty Index (GBD-FI) in the survey of health, ageing and retirement in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Accurate comparable prevalence proportions are required to better understand the epidemiology of frailty. Estimates in many countries are missing or incomparable. The Global Burden of Disease Frailty Index (GBD-FI) applies the deficit accumulation model to generate frailty scores from items available in the Global Burden of Disease study. OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the GBD-FI. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Survey of Health Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). A 20-item modified GBD-FI was compared with established frailty measures: a 70-item frailty index (FI-70), the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Frailty Phenotype (FP) and SHARE-FI. Area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were fitted to examine diagnostic accuracy for frailty and predictive validity for 2-year mortality. RESULTS: In total, 31,624 participants aged ≥50 years from 15 countries were included. Frailty prevalence was 22% using the GBD-FI (ranging from 8% in Switzerland to 41% in Poland). The GBD-FI had good to excellent diagnostic accuracy for frailty, irrespective of approach; the AUC ranged from 0.86 (95% confidence interval: 0.85-0.87) measuring frailty using the CFS to 0.94 (0.93-0.94) with the FI-70. The GBD-FI had similar accuracy for 2-year mortality (AUC 0.71, 0.69-0.74) compared with the CFS (0.73; P = 0.186), FP (0.73; P = 0.392) and SHARE-FI (0.70; P = 0.255) but lower than the FI-70 (0.76; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The GBD-FI demonstrated concurrent and predictive validity, suggesting it is a valid measure of frailty. It has the potential to be an efficient, replicable and consistent approach to comparing frailty between countries and regions across time using GBD data.

Validation of a Harmonised, Three-Item Cognitive Screening Instrument for the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE-Cog).

More accurate and standardised screening and assessment instruments are needed for studies to better understand the epidemiology of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia in Europe. The Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) does not have a harmonised multi-domain cognitive test available. The current study proposes and validates a new instrument, the SHARE cognitive instrument (SHARE-Cog), for this large European longitudinal cohort. Three cognitive domains/sub-tests were available across all main waves of the SHARE and incorporated into SHARE-Cog; these included 10-word registration, verbal fluency (animal naming) and 10-word recall. Subtests were weighted using regression analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed from the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves. Diagnostic categories included normal cognition (NC), subjective memory complaints (SMC), MCI and dementia. A total of 20,752 participants were included from wave 8, with a mean age of 75 years; 55% were female. A 45-point SHARE-Cog was developed and validated and had excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying dementia (AUC = 0.91); very good diagnostic accuracy for cognitive impairment (MCI + dementia), (AUC = 0.81); and good diagnostic accuracy for distinguishing MCI from dementia (AUC = 0.76) and MCI from SMC + NC (AUC = 0.77). SHARE-Cog is a new, short cognitive screening instrument developed and validated to assess cognition in the SHARE. In this cross-sectional analysis, it has good-excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying cognitive impairment in this wave of SHARE, but further study is required to confirm this in previous waves and over time.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Frailty Screening Instruments Validated for Use among Older Adults Attending Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Early identification of frailty can prevent functional decline. Although multiple frailty screens exist for use in Emergency Departments (EDs), few are validated against diagnostic standards such as comprehensive geriatric assessment. To examine the diagnostic accuracy of ED screens for frailty, scientific databases were searched for prospective diagnostic accuracy test studies from January 2000 to September 2022. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using QUADAS-C. Psychometric properties were extracted and analysed using R. Six studies involving 1,663 participants describing seven frailty screening instruments (PRISMA-7, CFS, VIP, FRESH, BPQ, TRST, and ISAR), representing 13 unique data points, were included. The mean age of participants ranged from 76 to 86 years. The proportion that was female ranged from 45 to 60%. The pooled prevalence rate of frailty was high at 59%. The pooled estimate for sensitivity was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.76-0.91) versus 0.77 (95% CI: 0.62-0.88) for specificity. Pooled accuracy based on area under the ROC curve was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.86-0.90). Although few studies were found, limiting the ability to conduct a meta-analysis of individual instruments, available frailty screens can accurately diagnose frailty in older adults attending the ED. As specificity was comparatively low, additional assessment may be required to identify those requiring inpatient management or onward community referral. Further study is therefore required.

Comparison of the Six Item Cognitive Impairment Test (6CIT) to Commonly-Used Short Cognitive Screening Instruments in a Memory Clinic Population.

Background: Short cognitive screening instruments (CSI) are required to identify cognitive impairment in busy outpatient clinics. While the Six Item Cognitive Impairment Test (6CIT) is commonly used, its accuracy in those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and against more widely-used CSIs is less well established. Objective: To examine the diagnostic accuracy of the 6CIT against the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci) screen across the cognitive spectrum in a memory clinic population. Methods: In total, 142 paired assessments were available (21 with SCD, 32 MCI, and 89 with dementia). Consecutive patients underwent a comprehensive assessment and were screened using the 6CIT, Qmci, and MoCA. Accuracy was determined from the area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). Results: The median age of patients was 76 (±11) years; 68% were female. The median 6CIT score was 10/28 (±14). The 6CIT was strongly, negatively, and statistically significantly correlated with the Qmci (r = -0.84) and MoCA (r = -0.86). The 6CIT had good accuracy for separating cognitive impairment (MCI or dementia) from SCD, (AUC:0.88; 0.82-0.94), similar to the MoCA (AUC:0.92; 0.87-0.97, p = 0.308), but statistically lower than the Qmci (AUC:0.96; 0.94-0.99, p = 0.01). The 6CIT was faster to administer, median time 2.05 minutes versus 4.38 and 9.5 for the Qmci and MoCA, respectively. Conclusion: While the Qmci was more accurate than the 6CIT, the shorter administration time of the 6CIT, suggests it may be useful when assessing or monitoring cognitive impairment in busy memory clinics, though larger samples are required to evaluate.

Validation of the Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC) among Older Adults in the Emergency Department.

Although several short-risk-prediction instruments are used in the emergency department (ED), there remains insufficient evidence to guide healthcare professionals on their use. The Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC) is an established screen comprising three Likert scales examining the risk of three adverse outcomes among community-dwelling older adults at one-year: institutionalisation, hospitalisation, and death, which are scored from one (rare/minimal) to five (certain/extreme) and combined into an Overall RISC score. In the present study, the RISC was externally validated by comparing it with different frailty screens to predict risk of hospitalisation (30-day readmission), prolonged length of stay (LOS), one-year mortality, and institutionalisation among 193 consecutive patients aged ≥70 attending a large university hospital ED in Western Ireland, assessed for frailty, determined by comprehensive geriatric assessment. The median LOS was 8 ± 9 days; 20% were re-admitted <30 days; 13.5% were institutionalised; 17% had died; and 60% (116/193) were frail. Based on the area under the ROC curve scores (AUC), the Overall RISC score had the greatest diagnostic accuracy for predicting one-year mortality and institutionalisation: AUC 0.77 (95% CI: 0.68-0.87) and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.64-0.82), respectively. None of the instruments were accurate in predicting 30-day readmission (AUC all <0.70). The Overall RISC score had good accuracy for identifying frailty (AUC 0.84). These results indicate that the RISC is an accurate risk-prediction instrument and frailty measure in the ED.

Burden of disease among older adults in Europe-trends in mortality and disability, 1990-2019.

BACKGROUND: It is important to understand the effects of population ageing on disease burden and explore conditions that drive poor health in later life to prevent or manage these. We examined the development of disease burden and its components for major disease groups among older adults in Europe over the last 30 years. METHODS: Using data from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 Study, we analyzed burden of disease trends between 1990 and 2019 measured by years of life lost (YLL), years lived with disability (YLD) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) among older adults (65+ years) in Western, Central and Eastern Europe using cause groups for diseases and injuries. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2019, the crude numbers of DALYs for all causes increased substantially among older Western Europeans. In Eastern Europe, the absolute DALYs also increased from 1990 to 2005 but then decreased between 2006 and 2013. However, DALY rates declined for all European regions over time, with large differences in the magnitude by region and gender. Changes in the YLL rate were mainly driven by the contribution of cardiovascular diseases. CONCLUSIONS: This study found an increased overall absolute disease burden among older Europeans between 1990 and 2019. The demographic change that has taken place in Eastern European countries implies a potential problem of directed resource allocation to the health care sector. Furthermore, the findings highlight the potential health gains through directing resources to health promotion and treatment to reduce YLDs and to prevent YLLs, primarily from cardiovascular diseases.

Informant-Administered Cognitive Screening as a Component of Memory Clinic Assessment: Overcoming Ethical and Practical Challenges.

Possin and Rosen provide a robust commentary exploring the challenges of using caregivers as cognitive testers. Informants have an important and often overlooked role in diagnosing cognitive impairment. O'Caoimh et al. show they can support cognitive screening in advance of clinic, suggesting new research avenues including the potential for home-monitoring. Although concerns testing may engender bias, introduce practice effects, and impact patient autonomy are valid and require examination, these should be viewed in light of patient preference, clinical need, and the broader ethics of assessing dementia. The importance of distinguishing concerns over accuracy and ethical appropriateness is also discussed.

Screening for Cognitive Impairment with the Quick Memory Check: Validation of a Caregiver Administered Cognitive Screen.

BACKGROUND: Self or home-administered cognitive screening instruments (CSIs) can reduce barriers to the early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. OBJECTIVE: To examine the acceptability and diagnostic accuracy of a caregiver-administered CSI, the Quick Memory Check (QMC). METHODS: Components of the Quick Mild Cognitive impairment (Qmci) screen (orientation, verbal fluency, and logical memory) were re-weighted to create the QMC, scored out of 100 points. Participants, attending a university hospital memory clinic, were provided administration instructions beforehand. Area under the curve (AUC) scores, adjusted for age and education, were compared with the Qmci screen and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Caregivers or family scored the QMC. RESULTS: In all, 366 participants were recruited; 53 with subjective memory complaints (SMC), 74 with MCI, 193 with dementia, and 46 normal controls. Median QMC scores for controls were 70±13 versus 60±20 for SMC, 52±18 for MCI, and 31±21 for dementia. The QMC had excellent accuracy (AUC 0.97) for cognitive impairment (MCI/dementia from controls), similar to the Qmci screen (AUC 0.98, p = 0.17) and MoCA (AUC 0.95, p = 0.13). At a cut-off of <52/100, the QMC had 83% sensitivity and 100% specificity for cognitive impairment. The QMC had lower accuracy differentiating MCI from SMC (AUC 0.73), albeit similar to the MoCA (AUC 0.70). CONCLUSION: The QMC, administered by caregivers in advance of clinic, compared favorably to established CSIs scored by trained raters. This caregiver, home-administered CSI is acceptable and can identify cognitive impairment, potentially improving efficiency by reducing testing time and patient stress in busy clinical settings.

Methodological considerations in injury burden of disease studies across Europe: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Calculating the disease burden due to injury is complex, as it requires many methodological choices. Until now, an overview of the methodological design choices that have been made in burden of disease (BoD) studies in injury populations is not available. The aim of this systematic literature review was to identify existing injury BoD studies undertaken across Europe and to comprehensively review the methodological design choices and assumption parameters that have been made to calculate years of life lost (YLL) and years lived with disability (YLD) in these studies. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, and the grey literature supplemented by handsearching, for BoD studies. We included injury BoD studies that quantified the BoD expressed in YLL, YLD, and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) in countries within the European Region between early-1990 and mid-2021. RESULTS: We retrieved 2,914 results of which 48 performed an injury-specific BoD assessment. Single-country independent and Global Burden of Disease (GBD)-linked injury BoD studies were performed in 11 European countries. Approximately 79% of injury BoD studies reported the BoD by external cause-of-injury. Most independent studies used the incidence-based approach to calculate YLDs. About half of the injury disease burden studies applied disability weights (DWs) developed by the GBD study. Almost all independent injury studies have determined YLL using national life tables. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable methodological variation across independent injury BoD assessments was observed; differences were mainly apparent in the design choices and assumption parameters towards injury YLD calculations, implementation of DWs, and the choice of life table for YLL calculations. Development and use of guidelines for performing and reporting of injury BoD studies is crucial to enhance transparency and comparability of injury BoD estimates across Europe and beyond.

The Experience of COVID-19 Visitor Restrictions among Families of People Living in Long-Term Residential Care Facilities during the First Wave of the Pandemic in Ireland.

Public health responses to COVID-19 in long-term residential care facilities (LTRCFs) have restricted family engagement with residents. These restrictions impact on quality of care and the psychosocial and emotional well-being of family caregivers. Following a national cross-sectional web-based survey, respondents were invited to provide personal reflections on visitor restrictions. This study aims to describe the consequences of these restrictions for individuals living in LTRCF and their families during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from open-ended questions contained within the survey were analyzed using Braun and Clarke's (2006) method of thematic analysis. Four themes were identified: 1. Altered Communication and Connection; 2. Emotional and Psychological Impact; 3. Protecting and Caring Role of Staff; 4. Family Role. Throughout the narrative accounts, it is evident that the visitor restrictions impacted on the emotional and mental well-being of families. Some respondents expressed frustration that they could not assist staff in essential care provision, reducing meaning and purpose in their own lives. COVID-19 LTRCF visitor restrictions made little distinction between those providing essential personal care and those who visit for social reasons. A partnership approach to care provision is important and should encompass strategies to maintain the psychosocial and emotional well-being of families and their relatives during times of self-isolating or restrictive measures.

The Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinimetric Properties of Screening Instruments to Identify Frail Older Adults Attending Emergency Departments: A Protocol for a Mixed Methods Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prompt and efficient identification and stratification of patients who are frail is important, as this cohort are at high risk of adverse healthcare outcomes. Numerous frailty screening tools have been developed to support their identification across different settings, yet relatively few have emerged for use in emergency departments (EDs). This protocol provides details for a systematic review aiming to synthesize the accumulated evidence regarding the diagnostic accuracy and clinimetric properties of frailty screening instruments to identify frail older adults in EDs. METHODS: Six electronic databases will be searched from January 2000 to March 2021. Eligible studies will include adults aged ≥60 years screened in EDs with any available screening instrument to identify frailty (even if not originally designed for this purpose). Studies, including case-control, longitudinal, and cohort studies, will be included, where instruments are compared to a reference standard to explore diagnostic accuracy. Predictive accuracy for a selection of outcomes, including mortality, institutionalization, and readmission, will be assessed. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity will be examined, and a random effects meta-analysis performed if appropriate. CONCLUSION: Understanding whether frailty screening on presentation to EDs is accurate in identifying frailty, and predicting these outcomes is important for decision-making and targeting appropriate management.

Using the "Surprise Question" to Predict Frailty and Healthcare Outcomes among Older Adults Attending the Emergency Department.

The "surprise question" (SQ) predicts the need for palliative care. Its predictive validity for adverse healthcare outcomes and its association with frailty among older people attending the emergency department (ED) are unknown. We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective study of consecutive patients aged ≥70 attending a university hospital's ED. The SQ was scored by doctors before an independent comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). Outcomes included length of stay (LOS), frailty determined by CGA and one-year mortality. The SQ was available for 191 patients, whose median age was 79 ± 9. In all, 56/191 (29%) screened SQ positive. SQ positive patients were frailer; the median clinical frailty score was 6/9 (compared to 4/9, p < 0.001); they had longer LOS (p = 0.008); and they had higher mortality (p < 0.001). Being SQ positive was associated with 2.6 times greater odds of admission and 8.9 times odds of frailty. After adjustment for age, sex, frailty, co-morbidity and presenting complaint, patients who were SQ positive had significantly reduced survival times (hazard ratio 5.6; 95% CI: 1.39-22.3, p = 0.015). Almost one-third of older patients attending ED were identified as SQ positive. These were frailer and more likely to be admitted, have reduced survival times and have prolonged LOS. The SQ is useful to quickly stratify older patients likely to experience poor outcomes in ED.

Frailty Screening in the Emergency Department: Comparing the Variable Indicative of Placement Risk, Clinical Frailty Scale and PRISMA-7.

Prompt recognition of frailty in the emergency department (ED) is important to identify patients at higher risk of adverse outcomes. Despite this, few studies examine the diagnostic accuracy of screening instruments for frailty, instead focusing on predictive validity. We compared three commonly used, short frailty screens to an independent comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in an urban University Hospital ED. Consecutive attendees aged ≥70 years were screened by trained raters, blind to the CGA, with the Variable Indicative of Placement risk (VIP), 3 and 4-item versions, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and PRISMA-7. Accuracy was measured from the area under the ROC curve (AUROC). In total, 197 patients were included, median age 79 (±10); 46% were female. Half (49%) were confirmed as frail after CGA. All instruments differentiated frail from non-frail states, although the CFS (AUROC: 0.91) and PRISMA-7 (AUROC: 0.90) had higher accuracy compared to the VIP-4 (AUROC: 0.84) and VIP-3 (AUROC: 0.84). The CFS was significantly more accurate than the VIP-3 (p = 0.026) or VIP-4 (p = 0.047). There was no significant difference between the CFS and PRISMA-7 (p = 0.90). The CFS and PRISMA-7 were more accurate and should be considered in preference to the VIP (3 or 4-item versions) to identify frailty in EDs.