Teaching Frailty to Medical Residents: A Needs Assessment Among Geriatrics Faculty.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of frailty is essential for meeting the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies for US trainees. The UK General Medical Council requires that frailty be included in undergraduate and graduate medical education curricula. Trainees are expected to appropriately modify care plans and help make patient-centered decisions, while incorporating diagnostic uncertainty, such as frailty, in older adults. Little is known about current needs for frailty instruction in graduate medical education in the US and beyond. OBJECTIVE: We sought to capture faculty perceptions on how frailty should be defined and identified, and what aspects and level of detail should be taught to residents. DESIGN: The authors developed a 4-item short response questionnaire, and faculty had the option to respond via electronic survey or via semi-structured interviews. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Respondents included 24 fellowship-trained geriatricians based at 6 different academic medical centers in a single urban metropolitan area. METHODS: An invitation to participate in either an electronic survey or semi-structured virtual interview was e-mailed to 30 geriatricians affiliated with an academic multi-campus Geriatric Medicine fellowship. Responses were transcribed and coded independently by two authors. RESULTS: Responses were received from 24 geriatricians via a combination of digital questionnaires (n=18) and semi-structured online interviews (n=6), for a response rate of 80%. Responses revealed significant diversity of opinion on how to define and identify frailty and how these concepts should be taught. CONCLUSIONS: As frailty is increasingly incorporated into clinical practice, consensus is needed on how to define and teach frailty to residents.

Long-Term Aspirin Use and Self-Reported Walking Speed in Older Men: The Physicians' Health Study.

BACKGROUND: Mobility limitation is a component of frailty that shares a bidirectional relationship with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Data are limited on the role of established CVD prevention therapies, such as aspirin, for prevention of frailty and mobility limitation. OBJECTIVES: Examine the association between long-term aspirin use and walking speed. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cohort of 14,315 men who participated in the Physicians' Health Study I, a completed randomized controlled trial of aspirin (1982-1988), with extended post-trial follow-up. MEASUREMENTS: Annual questionnaires collected data on aspirin use, lifestyle and other factors. Average annual aspirin use was categorized for each participant: ≤60 days/year and >60 days/year. Mobility was defined according to self-reported walking pace, categorized as: don't walk regularly (reference), easy/casual <2mph, normal ≥2-2.9mph, or brisk/very brisk ≥3mph. Propensity scoring balanced covariates between aspirin categories. Multinomial logistic regression models estimated odds of being in each self-reported walking category. RESULTS: Mean age was 70±8 years; mean aspirin use 11 years. There were 2,056 (14.3%) participants who reported aspirin use ≤60 days/year. Aspirin use >60 days/year was associated with drinking alcohol, smoking, hypertension, heart disease and stroke, while ≤60 days/year was associated with anticoagulation use and bleeding history. In all, 13% reported not walking regularly, 12% walked <2 mph, 44% walked ≥2-2.9 mph, and 31% walked ≥3 mph. After propensity score adjustment, regular aspirin use was associated with a faster walking speed. Odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 1.16 (0.97 to 1.39), 1.24 (1.08 to 1.43), and 1.40 (1.21 to 1.63) for <2 mph, ≥2-2.9 mph and ≥3 mph, respectively, compared to not walking regularly (p-trend<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of older men, long-term aspirin use is associated with a greater probability of faster walking speed later in life.

Defining Frailty in Research Abstracts: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Standardization.

Multiple definitions of frailty are used. We sought to quantify the frequency that frailty is insufficiently defined in published abstracts. We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE/PubMed for English abstracts of original research investigating frailty as an exposure or outcome in humans from 2015-2017. A complete definition of frailty included: 1) a named measure of frailty, including "frailty" alone, 2) details on variables included (e.g. grip strength), 3) number of variables included (e.g. 33-item frailty index), and 4) details on cutoffs or levels of frailty unless a definition was used continuously. Our search yielded 1,110 titles; 490 abstracts met review criteria, 348 abstracts had any definition of frailty and were included. Majority reported a single measure of frailty (n=313, 90%). The most commonly used measures were variations of Fried's phenotype (n=167, 48%) and Rockwood's cumulative deficit model (n=101, 29%). Only 56 abstracts had complete definitions (16%). In 123 abstracts (35%), a means of measuring frailty was named, but no additional details were given. When details of the frailty measure were described, they generally referred to cutoffs or levels rather than variables used in the measure. A minority of abstracts of original manuscripts related to frailty research had adequate definitions of frailty. We encourage scientists to adopt a standardized approach to defining the term for all abstracts related to frailty research to facilitate systematic reviews, meta-analysis, and accurate reporting of frailty science.

Impact of frailty on outcomes in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Age has historically been used to predict negative post-surgical outcomes. The concept of frailty was introduced to explain the discrepancies that exist between patients' chronological and physiological age. The efficacy of the modified frailty index (mFI) to predict surgical risk is not clear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to synthesize the current literature to quantify the impact of frailty as a prognostic indicator across all surgical specialties. DATA SOURCES: Pubmed and Cochrane databases were screened from inception to 1 January 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Studies utilizing the modified Frailty Index (mFI) as a post-operative indicator of any type of surgery. The mFI was selected based on a preliminary search showing it to be the most commonly applied index in surgical cohorts. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Articles were selected via a two-stage process undertaken by two reviewers (AP and DS). Statistical analysis was performed in Revman (Review manager V5.3). The random-effects model was used to calculate the Risk Ratios (RR). MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): The primary outcomes: post-operative complications, re-admission, re-operation, discharge to a skilled care facility, and mortality. RESULTS: This meta-analysis of 16 studies randomizes 683,487 patients, 444,885 frail, from gastrointestinal, vascular, orthopedic, urogenital, head and neck, emergency, neurological, oncological, cardiothoracic, as well as general surgery cohorts. Frail patients were more likely to experience complications (RR 1.48, 95%CI 1.35-1.61; p < 0.001), major complications (RR 2.03, 95%CI 1.26-3.29; p = 0.004), and wound complications (RR 1.52, 95%CI 1.47-1.57; p < 0.001). Furthermore, frail patients had higher risk of readmission (RR 1.61, 95%CI 1.44-1.80; p < 0.001) and discharge to skilled care (RR 2.15, 95%CI 1.92-2.40; p < 0.001). Notably, the risk of mortality was 4.19 times more likely in frail patients (95% CI 2.96-5.92; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: and Relevance: This study is the first to synthesize the evidence across multiple surgical specialties and demonstrates that the mFI is an underappreciated prognostic indicator that strongly correlates with the risk of post-surgical morbidity and mortality. This supports that formal incorporation of pre-operative frailty assessment improves surgical decision-making.