What patient-reported outcome measures may be suitable for research involving older adults with frailty? A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The need to develop and evaluate frailty-related interventions is increasingly important, and inclusion of patient-reported outcomes is vital. Patient-reported outcomes can be defined as measures of health, quality of life or functional status reported directly by patients with no clinician interpretation. Numerous validated questionnaires can thus be considered patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). This review aimed to identify existing PROMs currently used in quantitative research that may be suitable for older people with frailty.

METHOD

PubMed and Cochrane were searched up to 24/11/22. Inclusion criteria were quantitative studies, use of a PROM, and either measurement of frailty or inclusion of older adult participants. Criteria were created to distinguish PROMs from questionnaire-based clinical assessments. 197 papers were screened. PROMs were categorized according to the domain assessed, as derived from a published consensus 'Standard Set of Health Outcome Measures for Older People'.

RESULTS

88 studies were included. 112 unique PROMs were used 289 times, most frequently the SF-36 (n = 21), EQ-5D (n = 21) and Barthel Index (n = 14). The most frequently assessed outcome domains included Mood and Emotional Health and Activities of Daily Living, with fewer assessments of Participation in Decision-Making and Carer Burden.

CONCLUSIONS

PROM usage in frailty research is highly heterogeneous. Frequently used PROMs omit important outcomes identified by older adults. Further research should evaluate the importance of specific outcomes and identify PROMs relevant to people at different stages of frailty. Consistent and appropriate PROM use in frailty research would facilitate more effective comparisons and meaningful evaluation of frailty interventions.

Perioperative quality indicators specific to the practice of anesthesia in noncardiac surgery: an umbrella review

PURPOSE

Improvement in delivery of perioperative care depends on the ability to measure outcomes that can direct meaningful changes in practice. We sought to identify and provide an overview of perioperative quality indicators specific to the practice of anesthesia in noncardiac surgery.

SOURCE

We conducted an umbrella review (a systematic review of systematic reviews) according to Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. We included systematic reviews examining perioperative indicators in patients ≥ 18 yr of age undergoing noncardiac surgery. Our primary outcome was any quality indicator specific to anesthesia. Indicators were classified by the Donabedian system and perioperative phase of care. The quality of systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR 2 criteria. Level of evidence of quality indicators was stratified by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Classification.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Our search returned 1,475 studies. After removing duplicates and screening of abstracts and full texts, 23 systematic reviews encompassing 3,164 primary studies met our inclusion criteria. There were 330 unique quality indicators. Process indicators were most common (n = 169), followed by outcome (n = 114) and structure indicators (n = 47). Few identified indicators were supported by high-level evidence (45/330, 14%). Level 1 evidence supported indicators of antibiotic prophylaxis (1a), venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (1a), postoperative nausea/vomiting prophylaxis (1b), maintenance of normothermia (1a), and goal-directed fluid therapy (1b).

CONCLUSION

This umbrella review highlights the scarcity of perioperative quality indicators that are supported by high quality evidence. Future development of quality indicators and recommendations for outcome measurement should focus on metrics that are supported by level 1 evidence. Potential targets for evidence-based quality-improvement programs in anesthesia are identified herein.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020164691); first registered 28 April 2020.

The experience of hospital care for older surgical patients and their carers: A mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

A growing proportion of older adults are undergoing surgery, but there is a paucity of patient and carer experience research in this group. This study investigated the experience of hospital care in an older vascular surgery population for patients and their carers.

METHODS

This was a mixed-methods convergent design, including simultaneous collection of quantitative and qualitative research strands by combining open-ended questions with rating scales in a questionnaire. Recently hospitalised vascular surgery patients aged ≥65 years at a major teaching hospital were recruited. Carers were also approached to participate.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients (mean age 77 years, 77% male, 20% with a Clinical Frailty Scale score >4) and nine carers participated. The majority of patients reported that their views were listened to (n = 42, 89%), they were kept informed (n = 39, 83%), and were asked about their pain (n = 37, 79%). Among carers, seven reported their views were listened to and that they were kept informed. Thematic analysis of patients' and carers' responses to open-ended questions about their experience of hospital care revealed four themes in terms of what mattered to them: fundamental care including hygiene and nutrition, comfort of the hospital environment such as sleep and meals, being informed and involved in health-care decision-making, and treating pain and deconditioning to help recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults admitted to hospital for vascular surgery and their carers, valued highly the care that met both their fundamental needs and facilitated shared decisions for care and recovery. These priorities can be addressed through Age-Friendly Health System initiatives.

Effectiveness of early rehabilitation following aortic surgery: a nationwide inpatient database study

OBJECTIVE

Exercise immediately after aortic surgery is controversial with limited evidence. The present study aimed to assess whether early rehabilitation commencing within 3 days of aortic surgery improves physical functions at discharge more than usual care in patients after aortic surgery.

METHODS

We used the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, a nationwide inpatient database from more than 1600 acute care hospitals that covers approximately 75% of all intensive care unit (ICU) beds in Japan. We identified patients who underwent open or endovascular aortic surgery and were admitted to the ICU between July 2010 and March 2018. Patients beginning rehabilitation within 3 days of aortic surgery were defined as the early rehabilitation group and the remaining patients as the usual care group. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses to compare outcomes between the two groups.

RESULTS

Among 121,024 eligible patients, there were 44,746 (37.0%) in the early rehabilitation group and 76,278 (63.0%) in the usual care group. In inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses, Barthel index scores at discharge were significantly higher in the early rehabilitation group than in the usual care group (difference, 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 2.8-5.2). The early rehabilitation group had significantly lower in-hospital mortality, lower total hospitalization costs, shorter ICU stay, and shorter hospital stay than the usual care group.

CONCLUSION

Early rehabilitation within 3 days of aortic surgery was associated with improved physical functions at discharge, shorter ICU and hospital stays, and lower hospitalization costs without increased mortality.

Predictors of Survival in Patients Over 80 Years Old Treated with Fenestrated and Branched Endograft

BACKGROUND

Fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair endograft (f/bEVAR) allows the endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal and juxtarenal and pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (T-J-P-AAAs); however, given their high cost and complexity, their use should be limited to patients with life expectancy >2 years. Nevertheless, the number of patients older than 80 years treated by f/bEVAR is growing, with no hard evidence of the real efficacy in this context. The aim of the present study is to analyze the survival of ≥80-year-old patients treated with f/bEVAR, and to identify possible predictors of late mortality.

METHODS

An analysis of clinical, anatomical, and technical characteristics of patients treated with f/bEVAR for J-, P-, and T-AAA from 2010 to 2019 in a single academic center was performed. Follow-up data were collected prospectively with clinical visit and computed tomography angiography at discharge, after 6 months, and yearly thereafter. Survival after 2 years was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Possible predictors of mortality were evaluated by univariable/multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

In the study period, a total of 243 f/bEVARs were considered: 83 for TAAA (34%) and 160 for J/PAAA (66%). Mean age was 73 ± 6 years, with 35 (14%) patients ≥80 years old; 209 patients (86%) were male and 78 (39%) had an American Society of Anesthesiology score IV. The 30-day and 2-year survival were 96% and 80 ± 3%, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 36 ± 25 months, independent predictors of late mortality by Cox regression analysis were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic renal failure (CRF), and ≥80 years old (hazard ratio [HR] 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-3.2, P = 0.05; HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.01-3.4, P = 0.04; HR 3.1, 95% CI 1.5-6.3, P = 0.002, respectively). Preoperative clinical characteristics were similar in ≥80 years old versus younger patients, except for the prevalence of TAAA (14% vs. 38%, P = 0.04). The technical success and 30-day mortality were similar in ≥80 vs. <80-year-old patients (93% vs. 96%, P = 0.31; 7% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.60, respectively). The 2-year survival estimation was significantly lower in ≥80 years old compared with younger patients (62 ± 10% vs. 82 ± 3%, P = 0.003). The association of COPD and CRF significantly affects the 2-year survival in ≥80-year-old patients (no patients survived at 2 years) and was significantly different compared with the survival in ≥80-year-old patients without these risk factors (70 ± 11%, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The early mortality rate and the 2-year survival after f/bEVAR justify this type of treatment in patients ≥80 years old; however, the presence of comorbidities such as COPD and CRF significantly reduces mid-term survival in this group and should be taken into consideration in the indication to f/bEVAR.

Frailty status at admission to hospital predicts multiple adverse outcomes

Aims

frailty is proposed as a summative measure of health status and marker of individual vulnerability. We aimed to investigate the discriminative capacity of a frailty index (FI) derived from interRAI Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Acute Care (AC) in relation to multiple adverse inpatient outcomes.

Methods

in this prospective cohort study, an FI was derived for 1,418 patients ≥70 years across 11 hospitals in Australia. The interRAI-AC was administered at admission and discharge by trained nurses, who also screened patients daily for geriatric syndromes.

Results

in adjusted logistic regression models an increase of 0.1 in FI was significantly associated with increased likelihood of length of stay >28 days (odds ratio [OR]: 1.29 [1.10-1.52]), new discharge to residential aged care (OR: 1.31 [1.10-1.57]), in-hospital falls (OR: 1.29 [1.10-1.50]), delirium (OR: 2.34 [2.08-2.63]), pressure ulcer incidence (OR: 1.51 [1.23-1.87]) and inpatient mortality (OR: 2.01 [1.66-2.42]). For each of these adverse outcomes, the cut-point at which optimal sensitivity and specificity occurred was for an FI > 0.40. Specificity was higher than sensitivity with positive predictive values of 7-52% and negative predictive values of 88-98%. FI-AC was not significantly associated with readmissions to hospital.

Conclusions

the interRAI-AC can be used to derive a single score that predicts multiple adverse outcomes in older inpatients. A score of ≤0.40 can well discriminate patients who are unlikely to die or experience a geriatric syndrome. Whether the FI-AC can result in management decisions that improve outcomes requires further study.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians is associated with higher mortality compared with nonoctogenarians

OBJECTIVE

Age is a well-known independent risk factor for death after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, there is significant debate about the utility of AAA repair in older patients. In this study, mortality outcomes after endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) and open AAA repair (OAR) in octogenarians (aged ≥80 years) were compared with younger patients (aged <80 years).

METHODS

All patients recorded in the Vascular Quality Initiative database (2002-2012) who underwent infrarenal AAA repair were included. Univariable and multivariable statistics were used to compare perioperative (30-day) and 1-year mortality outcomes between octogenarians vs nonoctogenarians for OAR and EVAR.

RESULTS

During the study period, 21,874 patients underwent AAA repair (OAR, 5765; EVAR, 16,109), including 4839 octogenarians (OAR, 765; EVAR, 4074) and 17,035 nonoctogenarians (OAR, 5000; EVAR, 12,035). Octogenarians (mean age, 83.0 ± 0.1 years) were less frequently male (66% vs 75%) and had a higher prevalence of congestive heart failure (9.9% vs 7.1%), chronic renal insufficiency (12.2% vs 7.5%), and a history of aortic surgery (14.3% vs 7.7%) compared with nonoctogenarians (P < .01 for all). Intraoperative use of blood transfusions and vasopressors was more common in octogenarians for OAR (blood: 3.3 ± 4.4 vs 1.8 ± 3.7 units; vasopressors: 45.2% vs 32.8%) and EVAR (blood: 0.43 ± 1.7 vs 0.31 ± 1.6 units; vasopressors: 7.6% vs 5.7%; P < .01 for all). Contrast dye volumes used during EVAR were similar in octogenarians and nonoctogenarians (108 ± 71 vs 107 ± 68 mL; P = .18). Perioperative mortality after OAR was 20.1% in octogenarians compared with 7.1% in nonoctogenarians (P < .01). Perioperative mortality after EVAR was 3.8% in the octogenarians compared with 1.6% in nonoctogenarians (P < .01). One-year mortality among octogenarians vs nonoctogenarians was 26% vs 9.7% for OAR and 8.9% vs 4.3% for EVAR (log-rank test, P < .01 for both). Multivariable analysis controlling for baseline and intraoperative differences between groups demonstrated that age ≥80 years increased the risk of 30-day and 1-year mortality after AAA repair by 223% and 187%, respectively (P < .01 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

AAA repair should be approached with extreme caution in octogenarians. Perioperative and 1-year mortality rates after OAR are particularly high in the older population, suggesting that the appropriate aneurysm size threshold for OAR might be larger due to the greater operative risk in octogenarian patients.