Using frailty tools as prognostic markers in patients who are acutely ill

Frailty, Outcomes, Recovery and Care Steps of Critically Ill Patients (FORECAST): a prospective, multi-centre, cohort study

PURPOSE

Frailty is common in critically ill patients but the timing and optimal method of frailty ascertainment, trajectory and relationship with care processes remain uncertain. We sought to elucidate the trajectory and care processes of frailty in critically ill patients as measured by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and Frailty Index (FI).

METHODS

This is a multi-centre prospective cohort study enrolling patients ≥ 50 years old receiving life support > 24 h. Frailty severity was assessed with a CFS, and a FI based on the elements of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) at intensive care unit (ICU) admission, hospital discharge and 6 months. For the primary outcome of frailty prevalence, it was a priori dichotomously defined as a CFS ≥ 5 or FI ≥ 0.2. Processes of care, adverse events were collected during ICU and ward stays while outcomes were determined for ICU, hospital, and 6 months.

RESULTS

In 687 patients, whose age (mean ± standard deviation) was 68.8 ± 9.2 years, frailty prevalence was higher when measured with the FI (CFS, FI %): ICU admission (29.8, 44.8), hospital discharge (54.6, 67.9), 6 months (34.1, 42.6). Compared to ICU admission, aggregate frailty severity increased to hospital discharge but improved by 6 months; individually, CFS and FI were higher in 45.3% and 50.6% patients, respectively at 6 months. Compared to hospital discharge, 18.7% (CFS) and 20% (FI) were higher at 6 months. Mortality was higher in frail patients. Processes of care and adverse events were similar except for worse ICU/ward mobility and more frequent delirium in frail patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty severity was dynamic, can be measured during recovery from critical illness using the CFS and FI which were both associated with worse outcomes. Although the CFS is a global measure, a CGA FI based may have advantages of being able to measure frailty levels, identify deficits, and potential targets for intervention.

Diagnosing Frailty in Primary Care Practice

Frailty is a complex age-related clinical condition with increased vulnerability to negative health outcomes that manifest as a multidimensional syndrome and hence, a challenge to identify at-risk populations. We aim to summarize the implementation of strategies to diagnose fragility in family practice using current evidence. We searched the PubMed and Google Scholar databases for relevant articles, using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms "Frailty," "Frailty Scales," and "Primary Health Care." All original research articles on the elderly population (65 years of age or older) published in English and the last five years were included. Frailty diagnosis has resulted in positive outcomes in the overall literature. Recent hospital admission may indicate a health problem that can end up in a negative outcome and has been often described as associated with frailty. It was also shown to affect the intensive care units' mortality, in-hospital mortality, and long-term mortality. However, multiple screening instruments have been developed and validated to improve feasibility in clinical practice. The frequent lack of agreement between frailty instruments has slowed the broad implementation of these tools. The impacts of frailty warrant an upstream, proactive, holistic, interprofessional primary care approach to its identification, assessment, and management. It is a preventable disorder; identifying elderly patients at risk in primary care can help shape appropriate care processes tailored to their needs. This literature review aims to demonstrate the importance and strategies in identifying frailty in primary care settings and assess its impact on several outcomes.