A Tailored Discharge Program Improves Frailty and Mood in Patients Undergoing Usual Rehabilitative Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Prognostic Features of Sarcopenia in Older Hospitalized Patients: A 6-Month Follow-Up Study

Background: Sarcopenia is associated with adverse health outcomes. Understanding the association between sarcopenia, multidimensional frailty, and prognosis is essential for improving patient care. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and prognostic signature of sarcopenia in an acute hospital setting co-led by internists and geriatricians. Methods: Sarcopenia was assessed by applying the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) algorithm, including the SARC-F score, handgrip strength, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), and Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, to 97 older multimorbid inpatients (76.5 ± 6.8 years, 55% women). The patients underwent a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) including an evaluation of Geriatric Syndromes (GSs) and Resources (GR) and prognosis calculation using the CGA-based Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI), European Quality of life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Information on survival and rehospitalizations was collected 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. Results: Sarcopenia was present in 63% (95% CI: 54-72%) of patients and categorized as probable (31%), confirmed (13%), and severe sarcopenia (18%). Sarcopenic patients showed significantly higher median MPI-values (p < 0.001), more GSs (p = 0.033), fewer GR (p = 0.003), lower EQ-5D-5L scores (p < 0.001), and lower RSES scores (p = 0.025) than non-sarcopenic patients. Six months after discharge, being sarcopenic at baseline was predictive of falls (p = 0.027) and quality of life (p = 0.043), independent of age, gender, and MPI. Conclusions: Sarcopenia is highly prevalent in older hospitalized multimorbid patients and is associated with poorer prognosis, mood, and quality of life up to 6 months after discharge, independent of age, sex, and MPI as surrogate markers of biological age.

Which Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) instruments are currently used in Germany: a survey

BACKGROUND

The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) records geriatric syndromes in a standardized manner, allowing individualized treatment tailored to the patient's needs and resources. Its use has shown a beneficial effect on the functional outcome and survival of geriatric patients. A recently published German S1 guideline for level 2 CGA provides recommendations for the use of a broad variety of different assessment instruments for each geriatric syndrome. However, the actual use of assessment instruments in routine geriatric clinical practice and its consistency with the guideline and the current state of literature has not been investigated to date.

METHODS

An online survey was developed by an expert group of geriatricians and sent to all licenced geriatricians (n = 569) within Germany. The survey included the following geriatric syndromes: motor function and self-help capability, cognition, depression, pain, dysphagia and nutrition, social status and comorbidity, pressure ulcers, language and speech, delirium, and frailty. Respondents were asked to report which geriatric assessment instruments are used to assess the respective syndromes.

RESULTS

A total of 122 clinicians participated in the survey (response rate: 21%); after data cleaning, 76 data sets remained for analysis. All participants regularly used assessment instruments in the following categories: motor function, self-help capability, cognition, depression, and pain. The most frequently used instruments in these categories were the Timed Up and Go (TUG), the Barthel Index (BI), the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Limited or heterogenous assessments are used in the following categories: delirium, frailty and social status.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that the assessment of motor function, self-help capability, cognition, depression, pain, and dysphagia and nutrition is consistent with the recommendations of the S1 guideline for level 2 CGA. Instruments recommended for more frequent use include the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and the WHO-5 (depression). There is a particular need for standardized assessment of delirium, frailty and social status. The harmonization of assessment instruments throughout geriatric departments shall enable more effective treatment and prevention of age-related diseases and syndromes.

[Frailty: Prevention]

The Frailty syndrome is usually related to the aging process and chronological age, but it is not an inevitable consequence of it - at least until the final phase of life. Primary care interventions that promote physical activity and nutrition can prevent the progression from pre-frailty to frailty. This article presents the current state of knowledge on primary and secondary prevention of frailty.

Effects of the Multicomponent Cognitive Training Program BrainProtect in Cognitively Healthy Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Cognitive integrity is a fundamental driver of health. The exact structure of strategies against cognitive impairment is still under debate.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term effects of a multicomponent cognitive training (BrainProtect) with those of general health counseling (GHC) on cognitive abilities and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in healthy adults in Germany.

METHODS

In this parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT), 132 eligible cognitively healthy adults (age ≥50 years, Beck Depression Inventory ≤9/63; Montreal Cognitive Assessment ≥26/30) were randomized to either GHC (N = 72) or to intervention with BrainProtect (intervention group, IG; N = 60). IG participants received 8 weekly sessions of 90 min of the group-based BrainProtect program focusing on executive functions, concentration, learning, perception, and imagination, plus nutritional and physical exercise units. Before and after intervention, all participants underwent neuropsychological testing and HRQoL evaluation, blinded for pretest.

RESULTS

No significant training effect was observed for the primary endpoint of global cognition as assessed by CERAD-Plus-z Total Score (p = 0.113; ηp2 = 0.023). Improvements in several cognitive subtests were shown in the IG (N = 53) compared to the GHC (N = 62) without adverse events. Differences reached significance for verbal fluency (p = 0.021), visual memory (p = 0.013), visuo-constructive functions (p = 0.034), and HRQoL (p = 0.009). Significance was lost after adjustment, though several changes were clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

BrainProtect did not significantly impact global cognition in this RCT. Nevertheless, the results of some outcomes indicate clinically meaningful changes, so that a strengthening of the cognitive performance by BrainProtect cannot be excluded. Further studies with larger sample size are needed to confirm these findings.