Is Frailty Diagnosis Important in Patients with COPD? A Narrative Review of the Literature.

Frailty is prevalent in older adults and is related to a worsening functionality, quality of life, and health outcomes. Though there is an increasing interest in this field, the relationship between frailty and worsening COPD outcomes remains unknown. A narrative review of the literature with studies published between 2018 and 2022 was carried out to address three questions: the prevalence of frailty and other geriatric syndromes in COPD patients, the link between frailty and worsening health outcomes in COPD patients, and the non-pharmacological interventions performed in order to reverse frailty in these patients. A total of 25 articles were selected. Frailty prevalence ranged from 6% and 85.9%, depending on the COPD severity and the frailty measurement tool used. Frailty in COPD patients was related to a high prevalence of geriatric syndromes and to a high incidence of adverse events such as exacerbations, admissions, readmissions, and mortality. One study showed improvements in functionality after physical intervention. In conclusion, the prevalence of frailty is associated with a high incidence of geriatric syndromes and adverse events in COPD patients. The use of frailty screenings and a comprehensive geriatric assessment of COPD patients is advisable in order to detect associated problems and to establish individualized approaches for better outcomes.

Before-and-After Study of the First Four Years of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) Programme in Older Adults Undergoing Elective Colorectal Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine whether the inclusion of older patients undergoing elective colorectal cancer resection in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) programme could improve clinical outcomes during hospital admission. METHODS: A before-and-after study in ≥70-year-old patients electively admitted for colorectal cancer resection was designed. In total, 213 patients were included in the ERAS® group, and 158 were included in the control group. RESULTS: The average age was 77.9 years old (SD 5.31) and 57.14% of them were men, with a Charlson Index score of 3.42 (SD 3.32). The ERAS® group presented a lower transfusion rate of 42 (19.7%), compared to 75 (47.5%) in the control group (p < 0.001). The crude odds ratio (OR) for transfusion was 0.27 (95% CI 0.17-0.43; p < 0.001), and the adjusted odds ratio was 0.26 (95% CI 0.14-0.48; p < 0.001). The ERAS® group had a lower percentage of patients with moderate-severe malnutrition on admission, at 23.4% (37 patients) against 36.2% in the control group (42 patients) (p = 0.023), with an OR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.29-0.75; p < 0.002) and an adjusted OR of 0.48 (95% CI 0.29-0.78; p = 0.003). The number of patients who required admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) was also markedly lower: 54 from the ERAS® group (25.4%) versus 71 from the control group (44.9%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of ≥70-year-old adults in the ERAS® programme resulted in a decrease in transfusions, number of erythrocyte concentrates transfused, and number of ICU admissions, along with improved nutritional status.

Interventions to Improve Health among Reproductive-Age Women of Low Health Literacy: A Systematic Review.

Background: Limited or low health literacy (HL) has been associated with poor health outcomes, including inadequate self-caring and preventive behaviors. A few studies have systematically summarized the effect of interventions to improve reproductive health and care in women with insufficient HL. The main objective of the study was to investigate health care promotion interventions and examine their effectiveness on women with inadequate HL through a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT). Methods: RCTs and quasi-experimental studies that assessed HL interventions to improve reproductive health of women with low HL were included. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020137059). Results: Of the 292 records initially identified, a total of 6 articles were included for review. Five different HL screening tools were used. Four different interventions were included: educational intervention, communication skills, a multimedia interactive tool, and text adaptation to enhance reading comprehension. Not enough research practice has been conducted on the influence of interventions on HL, and thus, it is difficult to implement evidence-based interventions. Conclusions: Interventions aiming to benefit and improve HL should consider the complex web of intersectional determinants that end up shaping the opportunities of women to make optimal decisions regarding their health and care, and which may require attention to much more than clinical or service delivery factors.