A Frailty Instrument for primary care for those aged 75 years or more: findings from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe, a longitudinal population-based cohort study (SHARE-FI75+).

OBJECTIVE: To create and validate a frailty assessment tool for community-dwelling adults aged ≥75 years. DESIGN: Longitudinal, population-based study. SETTING: The Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). PARTICIPANTS: 4001 women and 3057 men aged ≥75 years from the second wave of SHARE. 3325 women and 2587 men had complete information for the frailty indicators: fatigue, low appetite, weakness, observed gait (walking without help, walking with help, chairbound/bedbound, unobserved) and low physical activity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The internal validity of the frailty indicators was tested with latent class analysis, by modelling an underlying variable with three ordered categories. The predictive validity of the frailty classification was tested against 2-year mortality and 4-year disability. The mortality prediction of SHARE-FI75+ was compared with that of previously operationalised frailty scales in SHARE (SHARE-FI, 70-item index, phenotype, FRAIL). RESULTS: In both genders, all frailty indicators significantly aggregated into a three-category ordinal latent variable. After adjusting for baseline age, comorbidity and basic activities of daily living (BADL) disability, the frail had an OR for 2-year mortality of 2.2 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.8) in women and 4.2 (2.6 to 6.8) in men. The mortality prediction of SHARE-FI75+ was similar to that of the other SHARE frailty scales. By wave 4, 49% of frail women (78 of 159) had at least one more limitation with BADL (compared with 18% of non-frail, 125 of 684; p<0.001); in men, these proportions were 39% (26 of 66) and 18% (110 of 621), respectively (p<0.001). A calculator is supplied for point-of-care use, which automatically replicates the frailty classification for any given measurements. CONCLUSIONS: SHARE-FI75+ could help frailty case finding in primary care and provide a focus for personalised community interventions. Further validation in trials and clinical programmes is needed.This study was supported the European Commission, the US National Institute on Aging, and the German Ministry of Education and Research.This is the final published version which was originally published by BMJ Open with with CC-BY-NC licence (R Romero-Ortuno,C Soraghan, BMJ Open 2014, 4:e006645

The Clinical Frailty Scale predicts inpatient mortality in older hospitalised patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease.

UNLABELLED: Parkinson's disease and frailty are both common conditions affecting older people. Little is known regarding the association of the Clinical Frailty Scale with hospital outcomes in idiopathic Parkinson's disease patients admitted to the acute hospital. We aimed to test whether frailty status was an independent predictor of short-term mortality and other hospital outcomes in older inpatients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease. METHOD: We conducted an observational retrospective study in a large tertiary university hospital between October 2014 and October 2016. Routinely measured patient characteristics included demographics (age and sex), Clinical Frailty Scale, acute illness severity (Emergency Department Modified Early Warning Score), the Charlson Comorbidity Index, discharge specialty, history of dementia, history of depression and the presence of a new cognitive impairment. Outcomes studied were inpatient mortality, death within 30 days of discharge, new institutionalisation, length of stay ≥ 7 days and readmission within 30 days to the same hospital. RESULTS: There were 393 first admission episodes of idiopathic Parkinson's disease patients aged 75 years or more; 166 (42.2%) were female. The mean age (standard deviation) was 82.8 (5.0) years. The mean Clinical Frailty Scale was 5.9 (1.4) and the mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 1.3 (1.5). After adjustment for covariates, frailty and acute illness severity were independent predictors of inpatient mortality; odds ratio for severely/very severely frail or terminally ill = 8.1, 95% confidence interval 1.0-63.5, p = 0.045 and odds ratio for acute illness severity: 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.1-1.6, p = 0.005). The Clinical Frailty Scale did not significantly predict other hospital outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The Clinical Frailty Scale was a significant predictor of inpatient mortality in idiopathic Parkinson's disease patients admitted to the acute hospital and it may be useful as a marker of risk in this vulnerable population

Frailty, the determinants of health and the new evidence base.

No abstrac

Allocating patients to geriatric medicine wards in a tertiary university hospital in England: A service evaluation of the Specialist Advice for the Frail Elderly (SAFE) team.

The number of older patients admitted to acute hospitals has increased; however, their needs are heterogeneous and there is no gold-standard method of triaging them towards practicing comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). In our hospital, the SAFE (Specialist Advice for the Frail Elderly) team provide an initial geriatric assessment of all emergency admissions of patients aged ≥75 years (with some assessments also occurring in those aged 65 to 74 years) and recommend as to whether CGA in a dedicated Department of Medicine for the Elderly (DME) ward may be required. SAFE assessments include routine screening for geriatric syndromes using validated tools. Our aim was to compare the characteristics (age, gender, acute illness severity on admission as per modified early warning score (MEWS), Charlson Comorbidity Index, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), presence of dementia and delirium) and outcomes (length of stay, delayed discharge, inpatient mortality, discharge to usual place of residence, and new institutionalization) of patients listed to a DME ward, to those not listed. We analyzed all SAFE team assessments of patients admitted nonelectively between February 2015 and November 2016. Of 6192 admissions, 16% were listed for a DME ward. Those were older, had higher MEWS and CFS score, were more often affected by cognitive impairment, had longer hospital stay, higher inpatient mortality, and more often required new institutionalization. Higher CFS and presence of dementia and delirium were the strongest predictors of DME ward recommendation. Routine measurement of markers of geriatric complexity may help maximize access to finite inpatient CGA resources

Falls in older adults

Falls are very common in older people, and for some the consequences are devastating. The clinical assessment, management and investigation of patients who present with falls can be challenging for non-specialists, and multiple guidelines and algorithms have been published to aid this. This article has been prepared as a concise reference that reviews the most recent evidence and covers the medical competencies on falls outlined in the $\textit{Curriculum for General Internal Medicine (Acute)}$ of the Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians of the UK. As in the curriculum, the emphasis is on the acute setting. Important topics covered include the epidemiology of falls, definition and classification, causes and risk factors, cumulative effect of risk factors and concept of individual falling threshold, physical and psychosocial consequences of falling, medical falls assessment in acute settings, differentiation between falls and syncope, principles of multifactorial falls assessment and intervention, teamwork and communication skills, and evidence-based strategies for prevention, including the latest developments in falls prevention research

Association of the clinical frailty scale with hospital outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The clinical frailty scale (CFS) was validated as a predictor of adverse outcomes in community-dwelling older people. In our hospital, the use of the CFS in emergency admissions of people aged ≥ 75 years was introduced under the Commissioning for Quality and Innovation payment framework. AIM: We retrospectively studied the association of the CFS with patient characteristics and outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study in a large tertiary university National Health Service hospital in UK. METHODS: The CFS was correlated with transfer to specialist Geriatric ward, length of stay (LOS), in-patient mortality and 30-day readmission rate. RESULTS: Between 1st August 2013 and 31st July 2014, there were 11 271 emergency admission episodes of people aged ≥ 75 years (all specialties), corresponding to 7532 unique patients (first admissions); of those, 5764 had the CFS measured by the admitting team (81% of them within 72 hr of admission). After adjustment for age, gender, Charlson comorbidity index and history of dementia and/or current cognitive concern, the CFS was an independent predictor of in-patient mortality [odds ratio (OR) = 1.60, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.48 to 1.74, P < 0.001], transfer to Geriatric ward (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.42, P < 0.001) and LOS ≥ 10 days (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.23, P < 0.001). The CFS was not a multivariate predictor of 30-day readmission. CONCLUSIONS: The CFS may help predict in-patient mortality and target specialist geriatric resources within the hospital. Usual hospital metrics such as mortality and LOS should take into account measurable patient complexity.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available via OUP at http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcv06

Clinical frailty adds to acute illness severity in predicting mortality in hospitalized older adults: An observational study.

AIM: Frail individuals may be at higher risk of death from a given acute illness severity (AIS), but this relationship has not been studied in an English National Health Service (NHS) acute hospital setting. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study in a large university NHS hospital in England. We analyzed all first non-elective inpatient episodes of people aged ≥75years (all specialties) between October 2014 and October 2015. Pre-admission frailty was assessed with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) of the Canadian Study on Health & Aging, and AIS in the Emergency Department was measured with a Modified Early Warning Score (ED-MEWS<4 was considered as low acuity, and ED-MEWS≥4 as high acuity). A survival analysis compared times to 30-day inpatient death between CFS categories (1-4: very fit to vulnerable, 5: mildly frail, 6: moderately frail, and 7-8: severely or very severely frail). RESULTS: There were 12,282 non-elective patient episodes (8202 first episodes, of which complete data was available for 5505). In a Cox proportional hazards model controlling for age, gender, Charlson Comorbidity Index, history of dementia, current cognitive concern, and discharging specialty (medical versus surgical), ED-MEWS≥4 (HR=2.87, 95% CI: 2.27-3.62, p<0.001), and CFS 7-8 (compared to CFS 1-4, HR=2.10, 95% CI: 1.52-2.92, p<0.001) were independent predictors of survival time. CONCLUSIONS: We found frailty and AIS independently associated with inpatient mortality after adjustment for confounders. Hospitals may find it informative to undertake large scale assessment of frailty (vulnerability), as well as AIS (stressor), in older patients admitted to hospital as emergencies.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Elsevier via https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ejim.2016.08.03

Delaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions.

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for routine frailty screening in general practice are increasing as frailty prevalence grows. In England, frailty identification became a contractual requirement in 2017. However, there is little guidance on the most effective and practical interventions once frailty has been identified. AIM: To assess the comparative effectiveness and ease of implementation of frailty interventions in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of frailty interventions in primary care. METHOD: Scientific databases were searched from inception to May 2017 for randomised controlled trials or cohort studies with control groups on primary care frailty interventions. Screening methods, interventions, and outcomes were analysed in included studies. Effectiveness was scored in terms of change of frailty status or frailty indicators and ease of implementation in terms of human resources, marginal costs, and time requirements. RESULTS: A total of 925 studies satisfied search criteria and 46 were included. There were 15 690 participants (median study size was 160 participants). Studies reflected a broad heterogeneity. There were 17 different frailty screening methods. Of the frailty interventions, 23 involved physical activity and other interventions involved health education, nutrition supplementation, home visits, hormone supplementation, and counselling. A significant improvement of frailty status was demonstrated in 71% (n = 10) of studies and of frailty indicators in 69% (n=22) of studies where measured. Interventions with both muscle strength training and protein supplementation were consistently placed highest for effectiveness and ease of implementation. CONCLUSION: A combination of muscle strength training and protein supplementation was the most effective intervention to delay or reverse frailty and the easiest to implement in primary care. A map of interventions was created that can be used to inform choices for managing frailty

Higher Physiotherapy Frequency Is Associated with Shorter Length of Stay and Greater Functional Recovery in Hospitalized Frail Older Adults: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Extra physiotherapy has been associated with better outcomes in hospitalized patients, but this remains an under-researched area in geriatric medicine wards. We retrospectively studied the association between average physiotherapy frequency and outcomes in hospitalized geriatric patients. High frequency physiotherapy (HFP) was defined as ≥0.5 contacts/day. Of 358 eligible patients, 131 (36.6%) received low, and 227 (63.4%) HFP. Functional improvement (discharge versus admission) in the modified Rankin scale was greater in the HFP group (1.1 versus 0.7 points, P<0.001). The mean length of stay (LOS) of the HFP group was 6 days shorter (7 versus 13 days, P<0.001). After adjusting for age, gender, comorbidity (Charlson index), frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale), dementia and acute illness severity, HFP was an independent predictor of functional improvement, shorter LOS and likelihood of being discharged without a formal care package. Prospective research is needed to examine the effect of physiotherapy frequency and intensity in geriatric wards.Funding was not required for this study