Utility of hospital frailty risk score for predicting postoperative outcomes in craniopharyngioma

Adaptation of the Risk Analysis Index for Frailty Assessment Using Diagnostic Codes

Importance

Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes after even minor physiologic stressors. The validated Risk Analysis Index (RAI) quantifies frailty; however, existing methods limit application to in-person interview (clinical RAI) and quality improvement datasets (administrative RAI).

Objective

To expand the utility of the RAI utility to available International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) administrative data, using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS).

Design, Setting, and Participants

RAI parameters were systematically adapted to ICD-10-CM codes (RAI-ICD) and were derived (NIS 2019) and validated (NIS 2020). The primary analysis included survey-weighed discharge data among adults undergoing major surgical procedures. Additional external validation occurred by including all operative and nonoperative hospitalizations in the NIS (2020) and in a multihospital health care system (UPMC, 2021-2022). Data analysis was conducted from January to May 2023.

Exposures

RAI parameters and in-hospital mortality.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The association of RAI parameters with in-hospital mortality was calculated and weighted using logistic regression, generating an integerized RAI-ICD score. After initial validation, thresholds defining categories of frailty were selected by a full complement of test statistics. Rates of elective admission, length of stay, hospital charges, and in-hospital mortality were compared across frailty categories. C statistics estimated model discrimination.

Results

RAI-ICD parameters were weighted in the 9 548 206 patients who were hospitalized (mean [SE] age, 55.4 (0.1) years; 3 742 330 male [weighted percentage, 39.2%] and 5 804 431 female [weighted percentage, 60.8%]), modeling in-hospital mortality (2.1%; 95% CI, 2.1%-2.2%) with excellent derivation discrimination (C statistic, 0.810; 95% CI, 0.808-0.813). The 11 RAI-ICD parameters were adapted to 323 ICD-10-CM codes. The operative validation population of 8 113 950 patients (mean [SE] age, 54.4 (0.1) years; 3 148 273 male [weighted percentage, 38.8%] and 4 965 737 female [weighted percentage, 61.2%]; in-hospital mortality, 2.5% [95% CI, 2.4%-2.5%]) mirrored the derivation population. In validation, the weighted and integerized RAI-ICD yielded good to excellent discrimination in the NIS operative sample (C statistic, 0.784; 95% CI, 0.782-0.786), NIS operative and nonoperative sample (C statistic, 0.778; 95% CI, 0.777-0.779), and the UPMC operative and nonoperative sample (C statistic, 0.860; 95% CI, 0.857-0.862). Thresholds defining robust (RAI-ICD <27), normal (RAI-ICD, 27-35), frail (RAI-ICD, 36-45), and very frail (RAI-ICD >45) strata of frailty maximized precision (F1 = 0.33) and sensitivity and specificity (Matthews correlation coefficient = 0.26). Adverse outcomes increased with increasing frailty.

Conclusion and Relevance

In this cohort study of hospitalized adults, the RAI-ICD was rigorously adapted, derived, and validated. These findings suggest that the RAI-ICD can extend the quantification of frailty to inpatient adult ICD-10-CM-coded patient care datasets.

The Limited Utility of the Hospital Frailty Risk Score as a Frailty Assessment Tool in Neurosurgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) is an International Classification of Disease 10th Revision-based scale that was originally designed for, and validated in, the assessment of patients 75 years or older presenting in an acute care setting. This study highlights central tenets inherent to the concept of frailty; questions the logic behind, and utility of, HFRS' recent implementation in the neurosurgical literature; and discusses why there is no useful role for HFRS as a frailty-based neurosurgical risk assessment (FBNRA) tool.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review of the literature per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, including all cranial and spinal studies that used HFRS as their primary frailty tool. Seventeen (N = 17) studies used HFRS to assess frailty's impact on neurosurgical outcomes. Thirteen total journals, 10 of which were neurosurgical journals, including the highest impact factor journals, published the 17 papers.

RESULTS

Increasing HFRS score was associated with adverse outcomes, including prolonged length of stay (11 of 17 studies), nonroutine discharge (10 of 17 studies), and increased hospital costs (9 of 17 studies). Four different HFRS studies, of the 17, predicted one of the following 4 adverse outcomes: worse quality of life, worse functional outcomes, reoperation, or in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Despite its rapid acceptance and widespread proliferation through the leading neurosurgical journals, HFRS lacks any conceptual relationship to the frailty syndrome or FBNRA for individual patients. HFRS measures acute conditions using International Classification of Disease 10th Revision codes and awards "frailty" points for symptoms and examination findings unrelated to the impaired baseline physiological reserve inherent to the very definition of frailty. HFRS lacks clinical utility as it cannot be deployed point-of-care at the bedside to risk stratify patients. HFRS has never been validated in any patient population younger than 75 years or in any nonacute care setting. We recommend HFRS be discontinued as an individual FBNRA tool.

Trends in frailty in brain tumor care during the COVID-19 pandemic in a nationwide hospital network in Germany

PURPOSE

Among brain tumor patients, frailty is associated with poor outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased frailty in the general population. To date, evidence on changes in frailty among brain tumor patients during the pandemic is lacking. We aimed to compare frailty among brain tumor patients in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic to the pre-pandemic era and to assess potential effects on brain tumor care.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, we compared frailty among brain tumor patients hospitalized during the COVID-19 pandemic in years 2020 through 2022 to pre-pandemic years 2016 through 2019 based on administrative data from a nationwide network of 78 hospitals in Germany. Using the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), frailty was categorized as low, intermediate, or high. We examined changes in frailty, patient demographics, the burden of comorbidity, rates of surgery, and mortality rates for different frailty groups during the pandemic and compared them to pre-pandemic levels.

RESULTS

Of the 20,005 included hospitalizations for brain tumors, 7979 were during the pandemic (mean age 60.0 years (± 18.4); females: 49.8%), and 12,026 in the pre-pandemic period (mean age: 59.0 years [± 18.4]; females: 49.2%). Average daily admissions decreased from 8.2 (± 5.1) during pre-pandemic years to 7.3 (± 4.5) during the pandemic (p < 0.01). The overall median HFRS decreased from 3.1 (IQR: 0.9-7.3) during the pre-pandemic years to 2.6 (IQR: 0.3-6.8) during the pandemic (p < 0.01). At the same time, the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) decreased from 17.0 (± 12.4) to 16.1 (± 12.0; p < 0.01), but to a larger degree among high compared to low frailty cases (by 1.8 vs. 0.3 points; p = 0.04). In the entire cohort, the mean length of stay was significantly shorter in the pandemic period (9.5 days [± 10.7]) compared with pre-pandemic levels (10.2 days [± 11.8]; p < 0.01) with similar differences in the three frailty groups. Rates of brain tumor resection increased from 29.9% in pre-pandemic years to 36.6% during the pandemic (p < 0.001) without differences between frailty levels. Rates of in-hospital mortality did not change during the pandemic (6.1% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.07), and there was no interaction with frailty.

CONCLUSION

Even though our findings are limited in that the HFRS is validated only for patients ≥ 75 years of age, our study among patients of all ages hospitalized for brain tumors in Germany suggests a marked decrease in levels of frailty and in the burden of comorbidities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Frailty Measured by the Risk Analysis Index Predicts Nonhome Discharge and Mortality After Resection in Refractory Epilepsy: Analysis of 1236 Patients From a Prospective Surgical Registry, 2012 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification of epilepsy surgery patients remains difficult. The Risk Analysis Index (RAI) is a frailty measurement that augments preoperative risk stratification.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate RAI's discriminative threshold for nonhome discharge disposition (NHD) and mortality (or discharge to hospice within 30 days of operation) in epilepsy surgery patients.

METHODS

Patients were queried from the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2012-2020) using diagnosis/procedure codes. Linear-by-linear trend tests assessed RAI's relationship with NHD and mortality. Discriminatory accuracy was assessed by C-statistics (95% CI) in receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

Epilepsy resections (N = 1236) were grouped into temporal lobe (60.4%, N = 747) and nontemporal lobe (39.6%, N = 489) procedures. Patients were stratified by RAI tier: 76.5% robust (RAI 0-20), 16.2% normal (RAI 21-30), 6.6% frail (RAI 31-40), and 0.8% severely frail (RAI 41 and above). The NHD rate was 18.0% (N = 222) and positively associated with increasing RAI tier: 12.5% robust, 34.0% normal, 38.3% frail, and 50.0% severely frail ( P < .001). RAI had robust predictive discrimination for NHD in overall cohort (C-statistic 0.71), temporal lobe (C-statistic 0.70), and nontemporal lobe (C-statistic 0.71) cohorts. The mortality rate was 2.7% (N = 33) and significantly associated with RAI frailty: 1.1% robust, 8.0% normal, 6.2% frail, and 20.0% severely frail ( P < .001). RAI had excellent predictive discrimination for mortality in overall cohort (C-statistic 0.78), temporal lobe (C-statistic 0.80), and nontemporal lobe (C-statistic 0.74) cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The RAI frailty score predicts mortality and NHD after epilepsy surgery. This is accomplished with a user-friendly calculator: https://nsgyfrailtyoutcomeslab.shinyapps.io/epilepsy/ .

Preoperative frailty risk in deep brain stimulation patients: Risk analysis index predicts Clavien-Dindo IV complications

OBJECTIVE

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) improves patients' quality of life in multiple movement disorders and chronic neurodegenerative diseases. There are no published studies assessing frailty's impact on DBS outcomes. We evaluated frailty's impacts on DBS outcomes, comparing discriminative thresholds of the risk analysis index (RAI) to modified frailty index-5 (mFI-5) for predicting Clavien-Dindo complications (CDIV).

METHODS

Patients who underwent DBS between 2015 and 2019 in the ACS-NSQIP registry were included. We employed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to examine the discriminative thresholds of RAI and mFI-5 and multivariable analyses for postoperative outcomes. Our primary outcome was CDIV, and secondary outcomes were discharge to higher-level care facility, unplanned reoperation within 30 days, in any hospital, for any procedure related to the index procedure, and extended length of stay.

RESULTS

A total of 3795 patients were included. In the ROC analysis for CDIV, RAI showed superior discriminative threshold (C-statistic = 0.70, 95% CI 0.61-0.80, <0.001) than mFI-5 (C-statistic = 0.60, 95% CI 0.49-0.70, P = 0.08). On multivariable analyses, frailty stratified by RAI, had independent associations with CDIV, i.e., pre-frail 2-fold increase OR 2.04 (95% CI: 1.94-2.14) p < 0.001, and frail 39% increase OR 1.39 (95% CI: 1.27-1.53), p < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

Frailty was an independent risk-factor for CDIV. The RAI had superior discriminative thresholds than mFI-5 in predicting CDIV after DBS. Our ability to identify frail patients prior to DBS presents a novel clinical opportunity for quality improvement strategies to target this specific patient population. RAI may be a useful primary frailty screening modality for potential DBS candidates.