Care recipients' physical frailty is independently associated with subjective burden in informal caregivers in the community setting: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Physical frailty is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in community-dwelling older adults. Burden in informal caregivers of older adults causes significant physical and psychological distress. However, the relationship between these two clinical phenomena has not been extensively studied. This cross-sectional study evaluated the relationship between physical frailty of community-dwelling older adults attending an outpatient geriatric clinic and the subjective burden reported by their informal caregivers. METHODS: We measured the following characteristics of 45 patient-caregiver dyads attending an outpatient geriatric assessment clinic: Physical frailty using the Fried Frail Scale (FFS); self-reported independence in activities of daily living (ADL) using the Katz Index; clinical diagnosis of dementia; and subjective caregiver burden using the short 12-item version of the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI). Multivariable linear regression was performed with FFS, Katz Index score, gender, age, and diagnosis of dementia as independent variables, and ZBI score as the dependent variable. RESULTS: Only physical frailty significantly predicted caregiver burden (ß = 8.98 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.15, 15.82). CONCLUSIONS: Physical frailty is independently associated with caregiver burden in a population of community-dwelling older adults. Despite limitations related to sample size and lack of data about caregiver characteristics, this study suggests that the relationship between physical frailty and caregiver burden merits further study.

Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale: Does It Predict Adverse Outcomes among Geriatric Trauma Patients?

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the laboratory Frailty Index (FI-lab) are validated tools based on clinical and laboratory data, respectively. Their utility as predictors of geriatric trauma outcomes is unknown. Our primary objective was to determine whether pre-admission CFS is associated with adverse discharge destination. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the relationships between CFS and in-hospital complications and between admission FI-lab and discharge destination. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a 4-year (2011 to 2014) retrospective cohort study with patients 65 years and older admitted to a level I trauma center. Admission FI-lab was calculated using 23 variables collected within 48 hours of presentation. The primary outcome was discharge destination, either adverse (death or discharge to a long-term, chronic, or acute care facility) or favorable (home or rehabilitation). The secondary outcome was in-hospital complications. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between CFS or FI-lab and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 266 patients included. Mean age was 76.5 ± 7.8 years and median Injury Severity Score was 17 (interquartile range 13 to 24). There were 260 patients and 221 patients who had sufficient data to determine CFS and FI-lab scores, respectively. Pre-admission frailty as per the CFS (CFS 6 or 7) was independently associated with adverse discharge destination (odds ratio 5.1; 95% CI 2.0 to 13.2; p < 0.001). Severe frailty on admission, as determined by the FI-lab (FI-lab > 0.4), was not associated with adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-admission clinical frailty independently predicts adverse discharge destination in geriatric trauma patients. The CFS may be used to triage resources to mitigate adverse outcomes in this population. The FI-lab determined on admission for trauma may not be useful.