Impact of Hospitalization on Patients Ability to Perform Basic Activities of Daily Living.

Functional independence is dictated by the ability to perform basic activities of daily living (ADLs). Although hospitalization is associated with impairments in function, we know less about patients' functional trajectory following hospitalization. We examined patients' ability to do basic ADLs across pre-admission, admission, and follow-up (discharge or two-weeks post-admission) and determined which factors predicted changes in ADLs at follow-up. A secondary analysis of a small prospective cohort study of older patients (n=83, 50 females, 81 ± 8 years) from the Emergency Department and a Geriatric Unit were included. ADL scores (dressing, walking, bathing, eating, in and out of bed, and using the toilet) and frailty level (via the Clinical Frailty Scale) were measured. Comparing follow-up to pre-admission, patients reported worse ADL scores for dressing (36% of patients), walking (31%), bathing (34%), eating (25%), in and out of bed (37%), and using the toilet (35%). Most patients (59%) had more difficulty with 1+ ADL at follow-up versus pre-admission, with one-fourth of patients having greater difficulty with 3+ ADLs. Older age and higher frailty level were associated with (all, p < .04) worse functional scores for eating, getting in and out of bed, and using the toilet (frailty only) at follow-up versus pre-admission. Here, most inpatients experienced worse difficulty performing multiple basic ADLs after hospital admission, potentially predisposing them for re-hospitalization and functional dependence. Older and frailer patients generally were less likely to recover to pre-admission levels. Hospitalization challenges patients' ability to perform ADLs in the short-term, post-discharge. Strategies to improve patients' functional trajectory are needed.

Upright time during hospitalization for older inpatients: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine: a) how long and how frequently older hospitalized patients spend upright; b) whether duration and frequency of upright time change by time of the day, the day of the week, and during hospitalization; and c) whether these relationships differ based on the mobility level of patients at admission. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 111 patients (82.2 ±â€¯8 years old, 52% female) from the Emergency Department and a Geriatric Assessment Unit who were at least 60 years old and had an anticipated length of stay of at least three days. The main outcomes were accelerometer-measured total upright time and number of bouts of upright time during awake hours. RESULTS: Patients were upright 15.9 times/day (interquartile range (IQR): 8.4-27.4) for a total of 54.2 min/day (IQR: 17.8-88.9) during awake hours. Time of day and day of week had little impact on the outcomes. Patients who walked independently at admission had 151.5 min (95% CI: 87.7-215.3) of upright time on hospital day 1 and experienced a decline of 4.5 min/day (-7.2 to -1.8). Those who needed personal mobility assistance or were bedridden had 29.5 min (-38.5-97.4) and 25 min (-48.3-100.3) of upright time on day 1, and demonstrated an increase of 3.6 (1.3-5.9) and 2.4 (0.05-4.5) min/day, respectively. CONCLUSION: Hospitalized older adults spend only 6% of their awake hours upright while in hospital. Patients who can walk independently are more active but experience a decline in their upright time during hospitalization.

What do we know about frailty in the acute care setting? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The ability of acute care providers to cope with the influx of frail older patients is increasingly stressed, and changes need to be made to improve care provided to older adults. Our purpose was to conduct a scoping review to map and synthesize the literature addressing frailty in the acute care setting in order to understand how to tackle this challenge. We also aimed to highlight the current gaps in frailty research. METHODS: This scoping review included original research articles with acutely-ill Emergency Medical Services (EMS) or hospitalized older patients who were identified as frail by the authors. We searched Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Eric, and Cochrane from January 2000 to September 2015. RESULTS: Our database search initially resulted in 8658 articles and 617 were eligible. In 67% of the articles the authors identified their participants as frail but did not report on how they measured frailty. Among the 204 articles that did measure frailty, the most common disciplines were geriatrics (14%), emergency department (14%), and general medicine (11%). In total, 89 measures were used. This included 13 established tools, used in 51% of the articles, and 35 non-frailty tools, used in 24% of the articles. The most commonly used tools were the Clinical Frailty Scale, the Frailty Index, and the Frailty Phenotype (12% each). Most often (44%) researchers used frailty tools to predict adverse health outcomes. In 74% of the cases frailty predicted the outcome examined, typically mortality and length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies (83%) were conducted in non-geriatric disciplines and two thirds of the articles identified participants as frail without measuring frailty. There was great variability in tools used and more recently published studies were more likely to use established frailty tools. Overall, frailty appears to be a good predictor of adverse health outcomes. For frailty to be implemented in clinical practice frailty tools should help formulate the care plan and improve shared decision making. How this will happen has yet to be determined.