“The feasibility and reliability of frailty assessment tools applicable in acute in-hospital trauma patients

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte I. Cords ◽  
Inge Spronk ◽  
Francesco U.S. Mattace-Raso ◽  
Michiel H.J. Verhofstad ◽  
Cornelis H. van der Vlies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Frailty Assessment

scholarly journals Older trauma patients are at high risk of delirium, especially those with underlying dementia or baseline frailty

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000639
Author(s):  
Danielle Ní Chróinín ◽  
Nevenka Francis ◽  
Pearl Wong ◽  
Yewon David Kim ◽  
Susan Nham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Patients ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
History Of

BackgroundGiven the increasing numbers of older patients presenting with trauma, and the potential influence of delirium on outcomes, we sought to investigate the proportion of such patients who were diagnosed with delirium during their stay—and patient factors associated therewith—and the potential associations between delirium and hospital length of stay (LOS). We hypothesized that delirium would be common, associated with certain patient characteristics, and associated with long hospital LOS (highest quartile).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of all trauma patients aged ≥65 years presenting in September to October 2019, interrogating medical records and the institutional trauma database. The primary outcome measure was occurrence of delirium.ResultsAmong 99 eligible patients, delirium was common, documented in 23% (23 of 99). On multivariable analysis, adjusting for age, frailty and history of dementia, frailty (OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.53, p=0.04) and dementia (OR 5.23, 95% CI 1.38 to 19.90, p=0.02) were independently associated with likelihood of delirium. Standardized assessment tools were underused, with only 34% (34 of 99) screened within 4 hours of arrival. On univariate logistic regression analysis, having an episode of delirium was associated with long LOS (highest quartile), OR of 5.29 (95% CI 1.92 to 14.56, p<0.001). In the final multivariable model, adjusting for any (non-delirium) in-hospital complication, delirium was independently associated with long LOS (≥16 days; OR 4.81, p=0.005).DiscussionIn this study, delirium was common. History of dementia and baseline frailty were associated with increased risk. Delirium was independently associated with long LOS. However, many patients did not undergo standardized screening at admission. Early identification and targeted management of older patients at risk of delirium may reduce incidence and improve care of this vulnerable cohort. These data are hypothesis generating, but support the need for initiatives which improve delirium care, acknowledging the complex interplay between frailty and other geriatric syndromes in the older trauma patients.Level of evidenceIII.

scholarly journals Long-Term Systematic Outcome Assessment of Patients Following Spine Surgery in Rwanda: The Use of Patient Reported Outcome Tools

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Steven Nshuti ◽  
Steven Nshuti ◽  
Beryl Guterman ◽  
David Hakizimana ◽  
Eric Buramba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Severe Disability ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Injured Patients ◽  
Spinal Cord Injured ◽  
Trauma Group

Background: We conducted a systematic evaluation of neurological, functional, quality of life and pain outcomes of patients who underwent spine surgery in our neurosurgery unit using patient reported outcome (PRO) assessment tools. Methods: The study was performed by assessing outcome of all the patients who underwent spine surgery at our department in a cross-sectional fashion using a 5-year operative database. This was an all-inclusive spine outcome study with 2 main groups; a trauma group composed of spinal cord injured patients and a non-trauma group composed of patients with spinal degenerative diseases, spinal tumors, deformity, infection, and vascular malformations. Results: Our analysis included 197 patients who met inclusion criteria for the study. The overall study population was mainly dominated by spinal cord injured patients and spinal degenerative disease patients; 34 % and 60.9 % respectively. The average age was 42 years (range: 15-78 years) with patients in the trauma group being substantially younger than the rest of the cohort. Eighty five percent of trauma patients presented with spinal cord injury causing neurological deficit, of which 58% had no preservation of motor function below the level of injury; ASIA IS A and B (35.8% and 22% respectively). Additionally, 68% of patients in the non-trauma group underwent surgery with severe disability. Overall, 60% of all trauma patients showed improvement of their neurological status as per ASIA IS. Of note, 40% of patients with preoperative ASIA IS B and 8% of patients with preoperative ASIA IS A gained full neurological recovery postoperatively (ASIA IS E). Using the Core outcome measurement Index (COMI) from patient’s perspective, 78.6% of patients reported to have no pain significant enough to make them stop their normal daily activities. Rate of overall return to work (RTW) in the non-trauma group was 77% with 52% of patients being fully functional without condition-related work interruptions. Conclusion: Careful selection of patients for surgery is key for good outcome of patients undergoing spine surgery. In contradiction to most other patients’ groups, patients with severe disability with spinal degenerative conditions might benefit most from surgery. Postoperative outcome of spinal cord injured patients with severe neurological deficits might be better than commonly believed. Controlled prospective data is likely to draw stronger conclusions.

scholarly journals TCT-870 Frailty Assessment Tools – Impact on short term outcome after TAVI

2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (17) ◽  
pp. B252
Author(s):  
Felix Woitek ◽  
Stephan Haussig ◽  
Norman Mangner ◽  
Robert Höllriegel ◽  
David Holzhey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Short Term Outcome ◽  
Frailty Assessment

scholarly journals Multicomponent Frailty Assessment Tools for Older People with Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 1085-1095 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L. Sutton ◽  
Rebecca L. Gould ◽  
Mark C. Coulson ◽  
Emma V. Ward ◽  
Aine M. Butler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older People ◽  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Frailty Assessment

scholarly journals Frailty assessment and acute frailty service provision in the UK: results of a national ‘day of care’ survey

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Knight ◽  
Catherine Atkin ◽  
Finbarr C Martin ◽  
Chris Subbe ◽  
Mark Holland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Care ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Care Pathway ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Screening Policy ◽  
Frailty Assessment ◽  
Care Survey ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Background The incorporation of acute frailty services into the acute care pathway is increasingly common. The prevalence and impact of acute frailty services in the UK are currently unclear. Methods The Society for Acute Medicine Benchmarking Audit (SAMBA) is a day of care survey undertaken annually within the UK. SAMBA 2019 (SAMBA19) took place on Thursday 27th June 2019. A questionnaire was used to collect hospital and patient-level data on the structure and organisation of acute care delivery. SAMBA19 sought to establish the frequency of frailty assessment tool use and describe acute frailty services nationally. Hospitals were classified based on the presence of acute frailty services and metrics of performance compared. Results A total of 3218 patients aged ≥70 admitted to 129 hospitals were recorded in SAMBA19. The use of frailty assessment tools was reported in 80 (62.0%) hospitals. The proportion of patients assessed for the presence of frailty in individual hospitals ranged from 2.2 to 100%. Bedded Acute Frailty Units were reported in 65 (50.3%) hospitals. There was significant variation in admission rates between hospitals. This was not explained by the presence of a frailty screening policy or presence of a dedicated frailty unit. Conclusion Two fifths of participating UK hospitals did not have a routine frailty screening policy: where this existed, rates of assessment for frailty were variable and most at-risk patients were not assessed. Responses to positive results were poorly defined. The provision of acute frailty services is variable throughout the UK. Improvement is needed for the aspirations of national policy to be fully realised.

An EXploration of the facilitators and barriers to paramedics’ assessment and treatment of pain in PAediatric patients following Trauma (EX-PAT)

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-18
Author(s):  
Barry Handyside ◽  
Helen Pocock ◽  
Charles D. Deakin ◽  
Isabel Rodriguez-Bachiller
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Common Symptom ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
South Central ◽  
Facilitators And Barriers ◽  
Scoring Tools

Background: Pain is a common symptom among patients presenting to ambulance services and is often associated with traumatic injury. Assessment and management of pain in children in the pre-hospital setting is suboptimal. This study aimed to understand the facilitators and barriers experienced by paramedics in their assessment and management of pain in children who have sustained traumatic injuries.Methods: Face-to-face, audio-recorded semi-structured interviews using a piloted topic guide were conducted with paramedics employed by South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust. Interviews were professionally transcribed, coded manually and analysed using thematic analysis.Results: Eleven interviews were conducted; three themes related to assessment and three related to management were identified. Previous positive experiences of utilising pain scoring tools were identified as a facilitator to pain assessment, whereas a lack of confidence in using pain scoring tools was a barrier. Patients’ understanding of and compliance with the tools were both a facilitator and a barrier to assessment. Facilitators to management included personal sub-themes of colleagues/others, exposure, being a parent, technology, severity of the injury and subjective pain scoring. Organisational facilitators included medicines, routes, and alternative methods. Situational facilitators included patient-specific solutions and parents. Five personal barriers to management included medicines, skill, consequences to self or patient, negative interactions, and limited exposure. Three organisational barriers included medicines and routes, equipment issues and choices, and training and culture. Within the theme of situation, two sub-themes emerged: patient-specific issues and environment-specific issues. Novel facilitators to emerge were those of alternative methods and being a parent.Conclusion: A multitude of factors incorporating situational, organisational, and personal all combine to determine how paramedics treat paediatric trauma patients. A multi-stakeholder approach to providing clearer assessment tools, improved education, equipment, and pharmacy options may improve assessment and management compliance for the benefit of the patient.

P4514Agreement and prognostic significance of 6 frailty tools in patients with chronic heart failure

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Sze ◽  
P Pellicori ◽  
J Zhang ◽  
J Weston ◽  
A L Clark
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Nyha Class ◽  
Frailty Index ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Misclassification Rate ◽  
Frailty Assessment ◽  
Frail Patients

Abstract Background Frailty is common in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and is associated with adverse outcome. Many frailty tools are available, however, there is no standard way of evaluating frailty in patients with CHF. Purpose To report the prevalence of frailty, agreement and prognostic significance amongst 3 frailty assessment tools and 3 screening tools in CHF patients. Methods We comprehensively studied frailty using 6 frailty tools. Frailty screening tools include: Clinical frailty scale (CFS); Derby frailty index & Acute frailty network frailty criteria. Frailty assessment tools include: Fried criteria; Edmonton frailty score & Deficit index. Since there is no gold standard in evaluating frailty in CHF patients, for each of the frailty tools, we used the results of the other 5 tools to produce a combined frailty index which we used as a “standard” frailty tool. Subjects were defined as frail if so identified by at least 3 out of 5 tools. Results 467 consecutive ambulatory CHF patients (67% male, median age 76 (IQR: 69–82) years, median NTproBNP 1156 (IQR: 469–2463) ng/L) and 87 controls (79% male, median age 73 (IQR: 69–77 years) were studied. Prevalence of frailty was much higher in CHF patients than in controls (30–52% vs 2–15%, respectively). Amongst the frailty screening tools, DFI scored the greatest proportion of patients as frail (48%) while CFS scored the lowest proportion as frail (44%). Amongst the assessment tools, Fried criteria scored the greatest proportion of patients as frail (52%) while EFS scored the lowest proportion as frail (30%). Frail patients were older, have worse symptoms, higher NTproBNP and more co-morbidities compared to non-frail patients. Of the screening tools, CFS had the strongest agreement with assessment tools (kappa coefficient: 0.65–0.72, all p<0.001). CFS had the highest sensitivity (87%) and specificity (89%) amongst screening tools and the lowest misclassification rate (12%) amongst all 6 frailty tools in identifying frailty according to the combined frailty index. During a median follow-up of 559 days (IQR 512–629 days), 82 (18%) patients died. 55% (N=45) of frail patients died of non-cardiovascular causes. Worsening frailty as detected by all 6 frailty tools was associated with worse outcome. A base model for mortality prediction including sex, NYHA class (III/IV vs I/II), BMI, log NTproBNP and haemoglobin had a C-statistics of 0.78. Amongst frailty tools: CFS and Fried criteria increased model performance most compared with base model (c-statistics: 0.80 for both). Patients who were frail according to CFS had a 9 times greater mortality risk than non-frail patients (Figure). Conclusion Frailty is common in CHF patients and is associated with worse outcome. CFS is a simple screening tool which identifies a similar group as lengthy assessment tools and has similar prognostic significance. Frailty screening should be incorporated into routine care of patients with CHF. Acknowledgement/Funding None

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document