The Clinical Frailty Scale: Estimating the Prevalence of Frailty in Older Patients Hospitalised with COVID-19. The COPE Study

Association between Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and clinical presentation and outcomes in older inpatients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Frailty is a physiological condition characterized by a decreased reserve to stressors. In patients with COVID-19, frailty is a risk factor for in-hospital mortality. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between clinical presentation, analytical and radiological parameters at admission, and clinical outcomes according to frailty, as defined by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), in old people hospitalized with COVID-19.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included people aged 65 years and older and admitted with community-acquired COVID-19 from 3 March 2020 to 31 April 2021. Patients were categorized using the CFS. Primary outcomes were symptoms of COVID-19 prior to admission, mortality, readmission, admission in intensive care unit (ICU), and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Analysis of clinical symptoms, clinical outcomes, and CFS was performed using multivariable logistic regression, and results were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Of the 785 included patients, 326 (41.5%, 95% CI 38.1%-45.0%) were defined as frail (CFS ≥ 5 points): 208 (26.5%, 95% CI 23.5%-29.7%) presented mild-moderate frailty (CFS 5-6 points) and 118 (15.0%, 95% CI 12.7%-17.7%), severe frailty (7-9 points). After adjusting for epidemiological variables (age, gender, residence in a nursing home, and Charlson comorbidity index), frail patients were significantly less likely to present dry cough (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.83), myalgia-arthralgia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.75), and anosmia-dysgeusia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.23-0.94). Confusion was more common in severely frail patients (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.64-5.97). After adjusting for epidemiological variables, the risk of in-hospital mortality was higher in frail patients (OR 2.79, 95% CI 1.79-4.25), including both those with mild-moderate frailty (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.23-3.19) and severe frailty (OR 5.44, 95% CI 3.14-9.42). Readmission was higher in frail patients (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.07-4.16), but only in mild-moderate frailty (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.17-4.75)..

CONCLUSION

Frail patients presented atypical symptoms (less dry cough, myalgia-arthralgia, and anosmia-dysgeusia, and more confusion). Frailty was an independent predictor for death, regardless of severity, and mild-moderate frailty was associated with readmission.

Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: the COPE multicentre European observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Effective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise healthcare systems have adapted to the outbreak. Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and Wave 2 (W2).

METHODS

All data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from 13 hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Data from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N = 1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median (interquartile range), W2 = 79 (73-84); W1 = 80 (74-86); had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs. 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs. 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.93], 28-day mortality adjusted odds ratio = 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR = 0.69 (95% CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were less frail, CFS [adjusted mean difference (aMD) = -0.50, 95% CI -0.81, -0.18], as well as presented with lower C-reactive protein (aMD = -22.52, 95% CI -32.00, -13.04).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline.

One-Year Report of COVID-19 Impact on Geriatric Patients: a Bio-Psycho-Social Approach

Background

Since December of 2019, coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly around the world. Our understanding of the infection has grown over the past year, and its impact on older adults is particularly significant. Apart from the direct impacts of COVID-19 infections, it has also led to lockdowns which, in turn, result in isolation and loneliness.

Method

We conducted a literature review of publicly available articles of the COVID-19 pandemic impact on the geriatric population between December 2019 and April 2021, a total of 748 articles.

Results

The review will be presented with the Bio-Psycho-Social model, covering how the biological, psychological, and sociological aspects of health are intertwined and impact older adults. Early studies have also highlighted the prevalence of post-COVID infection symptoms that typically fall under geriatric medicine care. We highlight the bidirectional impact of isolation and COVID-19 infections on geriatric health, as well as discuss pertinent topics such as vaccine efficacy, long-term sequelae of COVID-19 infections, and ageism.

Conclusion

This review seeks to present a one-year report of what is known about COVID-19 and geriatric medicine, as well as provide guidance to practitioners who care for older adults based on the most up-to-date literature.

Frailty assessment for COVID-19 follow-up: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is increasingly used for clinical decision making in acute care but little is known about frailty after COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate frailty and the CFS for post-COVID-19 follow-up.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre cohort study included COVID-19 survivors aged ≥50 years presenting for a follow-up visit ≥3 months after the acute illness. Nine centres retrospectively collected pre-COVID-19 CFS and prospectively CFS at follow-up. Three centres completed the Frailty Index (FI), the short physical performance battery (SPPB), 30 s sit-to-stand test and handgrip strength measurements. Mixed effect logistic regression models accounting for repeated measurements and potential confounders were used to investigate factors associated with post-COVID-19 CFS. Criterion and construct validity were determined by correlating the CFS to other concurrently assessed frailty measurements and measures of respiratory impairment, respectively.

RESULTS

Of the 288 participants 65% were men, mean (SD) age was 65.1 (9) years. Median (IQR) CFS at follow-up was 3 (2-3), 21% were vulnerable or frail (CFS ≥4). The CFS was responsive to change, correlated with the FI (r=0.69, p<0.001), the SPPB score (r=-0.48, p<0.001) (criterion validity) and with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (r=0.59, p<0.001), forced vital capacity %-predicted (r=-0.25, p<0.001), 6 min walk distance (r=-0.39, p<0.001) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) (r=0.59, p<0.001). Dyspnoea was significantly associated with a higher odds for vulnerability/frailty (per one mMRC adjusted OR 2.01 (95% CI 1.13 to 3.58), p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The CFS significantly increases with COVID-19, and dyspnoea is an important risk factor for post-COVID-19 frailty and should be addressed thoroughly.

Prospective telehealth analysis of functional performance, frailty, quality of life, and mental health after COVID-19 hospitalization

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is a global pandemic with poorly understood long-term consequences. Determining the trajectory of recovery following COVID-19 hospitalization is critical for prioritizing care, allocating resources, facilitating prognosis, and informing rehabilitation. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate recovery following COVID-19 hospitalization.

METHODS

Participants age 18 years or older who were hospitalized for ≥24 h due to COVID-19 completed phone/video call virtual assessments (including the 10-time chair rise test) and survey forms at three time points (2-6, 12, and 18 weeks) after hospital discharge. Univariate logistic and linear regression models assessed the associations of the outcomes with primary predictors (categorical age, sex, race/ethnicity group, and categorical pre-hospitalization frailty) at baseline; the same were used to assess differences in change from week 2-6 (continuous outcomes) or outcome persistence/worsening (categorical) at last contact.

RESULTS

One hundred nine adults (age 53.0 [standard deviation 13.1]; 53% female) participated including 43 (39%) age 60 or greater; 59% identified as an ethnic and/or racial minority. Over 18 weeks, the mean time to complete the 10-time chair rise test decreased (i.e., improved) by 6.0 s (95% CI: 4.1, 7.9 s; p < 0.001); this change did not differ by pre-hospital frailty, race/ethnicity group, or sex, but those age ≥ 60 had greater improvement. At weeks 2-6, 67% of participants reported a worse Clinical Frailty Scale category compared to their pre-hospitalization level, whereas 42% reported a worse frailty score at 18 weeks. Participants who did not return to pre-hospitalization levels were more likely to be female, younger, and report a pre-hospitalization category of 'very fit' or 'well'.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that functional performance improved from weeks 2-6 to 18 weeks of follow-up; that incident clinical frailty developed in some individuals following COVID-19; and that age, sex, race/ethnicity, and pre-hospitalization frailty status may impact recovery from COVID-19. Notably, individuals age 60 and older were more likely than those under age 45 years to return to their pre-hospitalization status and to make greater improvements in functional performance. The results of the present study provide insight into the trajectory of recovery among a representative cohort of individuals hospitalized due to COVID-19.

Direct and Indirect Effects of COVID-19 in Frail Elderly: Interventions and Recommendations

Frailty is a state of vulnerability to stressors because of a decreased physiological reserve, resulting in poor health outcomes. This state is related to chronic conditions, many of which are risk factors for outcomes in elderly patients having SARS-COV-2. This review aims to describe frailty as a physiological vulnerability agent during the COVID-19 pandemic in elderly patients, summarizing the direct and indirect effects caused by the SARS-COV-2 infection and its prognosis in frail individuals, as well as the interventions and recommendations to reduce their effects. Cohort studies have shown that patients with a Clinical Frailty Scale higher than five have a higher risk of mortality and use of mechanical ventilation after COVID-19; nonetheless, other scales have also associated frailty with longer hospital stays and more severe forms of the disease. Additionally, the indirect effects caused by the pandemic have a negative impact on the health status of older people. Due to the above, a holistic intervention is proposed based on a comprehensive geriatric assessment for frail patients (preventive or post-infection) with emphasis on physical activity and nutritional recommendations, which could be a potential preventive intervention in viral infections by COVID-19.

A Review of Web-Based COVID-19 Resources for Palliative Care Clinicians, Patients, and Their Caregivers

Palliative and end-of-life care has been pushed to the forefront of medical care during the pandemic caused by the coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19). Palliative care organizations have responded to the growing demand for the rapid dissemination of research, clinical guidance, and instructions for care to clinicians, patients with COVID-19, and their caregivers by creating COVID-19 resource Web pages. Here, end users can access resources that can be updated in real time. These Web pages, however, can be variable in what resources they offer and for whom they are designed for (clinicians, patients, caregivers). Therefore, this project was conducted to consolidate these resources via summary tables of specific contents available through each Web page grouped by palliative care domains (eg, care discussion and planning, communication, symptom management, care access) and to identify the target audience. This environmental scan was conducted by compiling a comprehensive list of COVID-19 resource Web pages of palliative care organizations generated by reviewing previously published research studies and consulting with palliative care research experts. Snowballing techniques were used to identify resource Web pages not captured in the initial scan. Two reviewers independently evaluated eligible Web pages for content via a form developed for the study, and Cohen κ statistic was calculated to ensure interrater reliability. The final κ statistic was 0.76. Of the 24 websites screened, 15 websites met our eligibility criteria. Among the eligible resource Web pages, most (n = 12, 80%) had specific target audiences and care settings, whereas the rest presented information targeted to all audiences. Although 11 Web pages offered resources that addressed all 4 domains, only 1 Web page conveyed all 12 subdomains. We recommend the use of this guide to all frontline clinicians who require guidance in clinically managing patients with COVID-19 receiving palliative care and/or end-of-life care.

Clinical presentation and outcomes of COVID-19 in older hospitalised patients assessed by the record-based multidimensional prognostic index, a cross-sectional study

Aim

Confusion was more prevalent in frail than in non-frail older patients at hospital admission.

Finding

COVID-19 and accelerated functional decline were associated among frail older hospitalised patients when compared to non-frail.

Message

Ninety-day all-cause mortality was 70% among frail hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and 15% among non-frail.

Purpose

Older people are the most frequently hospital admitted patients with COVID-19. We aimed to describe the clinical presentation of COVID-19 among frail and nonfrail older hospitalised patients and to evaluate the potential association between frailty and clinical course, decision of treatment level with outcomes change in functional capacity and survival.

Methods

We performed a multi-center, retrospective cross-sectional cohort study examining data on clinical presentation and frailty-related domains for hospitalised people aged 75 + years with a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) test. Frailty was assessed at admission using record-based MPI (rMPI) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Decision on treatment level about invasive ventilation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), change in CFS-score from admission to discharge, changed need of home care, and in-hospital, 30-day and 90-day mortality were registered.

Results

100 patients (median age 82 years (IQR 78–86), 56% female) with COVID-19 were included. 54 patients were assessed moderately or severely frail (rMPI-score = 2 or 3) and compared to non-frail (rMPI-score = 1). At admission, frail patients presented more frequently with confusion. At discharge, functional decline measured by change in CFS and increased home care was more prevalent among frail than the non-frail. Decisions about no invasive ventilation or CPR were more prevalent among frail older patients with COVID-19 than non-frail. Ninety-day mortality was 70% among frail patients versus 15% in non-frail.

Conclusion

Frailty seems to be associated with confusion, more frequent decisions about treatment level, larger functional decline at discharge and a higher mortality rate among older patients with COVID-19.

Routine Frailty Screening in Critical Illness: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Australia and New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Frailty is associated with poor outcomes in critical illness. However, it is unclear whether frailty screening on admission to the ICU can be conducted routinely at the population level and whether it has prognostic importance.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Can population-scale frailty screening with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) be implemented for critically ill adults in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) and can it identify patients at risk of negative outcomes?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a binational prospective cohort study of critically ill adult patients admitted between July 1, 2018, and June 30, 2020, in 175 ICUs in ANZ. We classified frailty with the CFS on admission to the ICU. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), discharge destination, complications (delirium, pressure injury), and duration of survival.

RESULTS

We included 234,568 critically ill patients; 45,245 (19%) were diagnosed as living with frailty before ICU admission. Patients with vs without frailty had higher in-hospital mortality (16% vs 5%; P < .001), delirium (10% vs 4%; P < .001), longer LOS in the ICU and hospital, and increased new chronic care discharge (3% vs 1%; P < .001), with worse outcomes associated with increasing CFS category. Of patients with very severe frailty (CFS score, 8), 39% died in hospital vs 2% of very fit patients (CFS score, 1; multivariate categorical CFS score, 8 [reference, 1]; OR, 7.83 [95% CI, 6.39-9.59]; P < .001). After adjustment for illness severity, frailty remained highly significantly predictive of mortality, including among patients younger than 50 years, with improvement in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III-j score to 0.882 (95% CI, 0.879-0.885) from 0.868 (95% CI, 0.866-0.871) with the addition of frailty (P < .001).

INTERPRETATION

Large-scale population screening for frailty degree in critical illness was possible and prognostically important, with greater frailty (especially CFS score of ≥ 6) associated with worse outcomes, including among younger patients.

Screening for Sarcopenia (Physical Frailty) in the COVID-19 Era

Although the numbers of aged populations have risen considerably in the last few decades, the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has revealed an extensive vulnerability among these populations. Sarcopenia is an age-related disorder that increases hospitalization, dependencies, and mortality in older adults. It starts to develop in midlife or even earlier as a result of unbalanced diet/poor nutrition and low levels of physical activity, in addition to chronic disorders such as obesity and diabetes mellitus. Given that social isolation is adopted as the most protective measure against COVID-19, the level of physical activity and the intake of adequate diet have considerably declined, especially among older adults-denoting an increased possibility for developing sarcopenia. Research also shows a higher vulnerability of sarcopenic people to COVID-19 as well as the development of wasting disorders such as sarcopenia and cachexia in a considerable proportion of symptomatic and recovering COVID-19 patients. Muscular wasting in COVID-19 is associated with poor prognosis. Accordingly, early detection and proper management of sarcopenia and wasting conditions in older adults and COVID-19 patients may minimize morbidity and mortality during the current COVID-19 crisis. This review explored different aspects of screening for sarcopenia, stressing their relevance to the detection of altered muscular structure and performance in patients with COVID-19. Current guidelines recommend prior evaluation of muscle strength by simple measures such as grip strength to identify individuals with proven weakness who then would be screened for muscle mass loss. The latter is best measured by MRI and CT. However, due to the high cost and radiation risk entailed by these techniques, other simpler and cheaper techniques such as DXA and ultrasound are given preference. Muscle loss in COVID-19 patients was measured during the acute phase by CT scanning of the pectoralis muscle simultaneously during a routine check for lung fibrosis, which seems to be an efficient evaluation of sarcopenia among those patients with no additional cost. In recovering patients, muscle strength and physical performance have been evaluated by electromyography and traditional tests such as the six-minute walk test. Effective preventive and therapeutic interventions are necessary in order to prevent muscle loss and associated physical decline in COVID-19 patients.

Frailty Assessment in Clinical Practice: Opportunity in the Midst of a Pandemic

Emerging evidence from studies of older adults hospitalised with COVID-19 suggests that there is a high prevalence of frailty in this patient group. We reflect on the measurement of frailty in older patients hospitalized as an emergency and the translation of frailty from a research to a clinical concept. We consider whether, despite the contemporary challenges in the care of older adults as a result of COVID-19, there are opportunities for care quality improvement during a pandemic.