A systematic review of frailty assessment tools used in vascular surgery research

Perceptions, awareness, and implementation surrounding the assessment of frailty amongst vascular surgeons in Italy: Results from a nationwide cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

We conducted this survey to gain insight into the real-life application and perceptions regarding the importance of peri-operative frailty assessment amongst vascular surgeons in Italy.

METHODS

Italian vascular surgeons were invited to participate in the survey using the list provided by the Italian Society for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (1050 invited participants). A dedicated link to the survey was emailed through Google Forms, and reminders were automatically sent on a bi-weekly basis for a total of 8 weeks before stopping data collection.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 225 respondents, thereby yielding an overall 21.5% response rate. While the vast majority of respondents stated they were aware of the meaning of frailty (93%) and agreed that its assessment was clinically relevant for patients undergoing vascular surgery (99%), only 44% of surveyed surgeons reported that they used a specific tool for peri-operative frailty assessment. However, most respondents indicated that routine evaluation of frailty was not performed at their institution (87%). The main limitations were identified as being the lack of confidence in choosing the best tool, followed by lack of awareness, lack of skilled operators, and lack of time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that whilst most vascular surgeons in Italy are aware of the importance of frailty in affecting surgical outcomes across various interventions in the elective and non-elective settings, there is poor implementation of formal frailty assessment.

Frailty Assessment in Vascular OUtpatients Review (FAVOUR) protocol: single-centre prospective cohort study comparing feasibility and prognostic value of commonly used frailty assessment tools

INTRODUCTION

Frailty has consistently demonstrated associations with poorer healthcare outcomes. Vascular guidelines have recognised the importance of frailty assessment. However, an abundance of frailty tools and a lack of prospective studies confirming suitability of routine frailty assessment in clinical practice has delayed the uptake of these guidelines. The Frailty Assessment in Vascular OUtpatients Review study speaks to this evidence gap. The primary aim is to assess feasibility of implementing routine frailty assessment in a reproducible outpatient setting. Secondary objectives include comparing prognostic values and interuser agreement across five frailty assessment tools.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This single-centre prospective cohort study of feasibility is conducted in a rapid-referral vascular surgery clinic, serving a population of 2 million. Adults with capacity (>18 years), attending a clinic for any reason, are eligible for inclusion. Five assessments are completed by patient (Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and Frail NonDisabled Questionnaire), clinician (CFS, Healthcare Improvement Scotland FRAIL tool and 'Initial Clinical Evaluation') and researcher (11-item modified Frailty Index). Consistent with feasibility objectives, outcome measures include recruitment rates, frailty assessment completion rates, time-to-complete assessments and interuser variability. Electronic follow-up at 30 days and 1 year will assess home-time and mortality as prognostic indicators. Patients treated surgically/endovascularly will undergo additional 30-day and 1-year postoperative follow-up, outcome measures include: surgical procedure, mortality, complications (according to Clavien-Dindo Classification), length of stay, readmission rates, non-home discharge, home-time, higher social care requirements on discharge and amputation-free survival. Prognostic value will be compared by area under receiver operating characteristic curves. Continuous outcome variables will be analysed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Interuser agreement will be compared by percentage agreement in Cohen's kappa coefficient.  ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is sponsored by National Health Service Greater Glasgow and Clyde (R&IUGN23CE014). London-Riverside REC (23/PR/0062) granted ethical approval. Results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed vascular surgery and geriatric medicine themed journals and presentation at similar scientific conferences.

TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06040658. Stage of study: pre-results.