1
|
Singer JP, Christie JD, Diamond JM, Anderson MA, Benvenuto LA, Gao Y, Arcasoy SM, Lederer DJ, Calabrese D, Wang P, Hays SR, Kukreja J, Venado A, Kolaitis NA, Leard LE, Shah RJ, Kleinhenz ME, Golden J, Betancourt L, Oyster M, Zaleski D, Adler J, Kalman L, Balar P, Patel S, Medikonda N, Koons B, Tevald M, Covinsky KE, Greenland JR, Katz PK. Development of the Lung Transplant Frailty Scale (LT-FS). J Heart Lung Transplant 2023; 42:892-904. [PMID: 36925382 PMCID: PMC11022684 DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2023.02.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2022] [Revised: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 02/13/2023] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Existing measures of frailty developed in community dwelling older adults may misclassify frailty in lung transplant candidates. We aimed to develop a novel frailty scale for lung transplantation with improved performance characteristics. METHODS We measured the short physical performance battery (SPPB), fried frailty phenotype (FFP), Body Composition, and serum Biomarkers representative of putative frailty mechanisms. We applied a 4-step established approach (identify frailty domain variable bivariate associations with the outcome of waitlist delisting or death; build models sequentially incorporating variables from each frailty domain cluster; retain variables that improved model performance ability by c-statistic or AIC) to develop 3 candidate "Lung Transplant Frailty Scale (LT-FS)" measures: 1 incorporating readily available clinical data; 1 adding muscle mass, and 1 adding muscle mass and research-grade Biomarkers. We compared construct and predictive validity of LT-FS models to the SPPB and FFP by ANOVA, ANCOVA, and Cox proportional-hazard modeling. RESULTS In 342 lung transplant candidates, LT-FS models exhibited superior construct and predictive validity compared to the SPPB and FFP. The addition of muscle mass and Biomarkers improved model performance. Frailty by all measures was associated with waitlist disability, poorer HRQL, and waitlist delisting/death. LT-FS models exhibited stronger associations with waitlist delisting/death than SPPB or FFP (C-statistic range: 0.73-0.78 vs. 0.57 and 0.55 for SPPB and FFP, respectively). Compared to SPPB and FFP, LT-FS models were generally more strongly associated with delisting/death and improved delisting/death net reclassification, with greater improvements with increasing LT-FS model complexity (range: 0.11-0.34). For example, LT-FS-Body Composition hazard ratio for delisting/death: 6.0 (95%CI: 2.5, 14.2), SPPB HR: 2.5 (95%CI: 1.1, 5.8), FFP HR: 4.3 (95%CI: 1.8, 10.1). Pre-transplant LT-FS frailty, but not SPPB or FFP, was associated with mortality after transplant. CONCLUSIONS The LT-FS is a disease-specific physical frailty measure with face and construct validity that has superior predictive validity over established measures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan P Singer
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA.
| | - Jason D Christie
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Joshua M Diamond
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Michaela A Anderson
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Luke A Benvenuto
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, Villanova, Pennsylvania
| | - Ying Gao
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Selim M Arcasoy
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, Villanova, Pennsylvania
| | | | - Daniel Calabrese
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA; Medical Service, San Francisco VA Health Care System, San Francisco, California
| | - Ping Wang
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Steven R Hays
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Jasleen Kukreja
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Aida Venado
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Nicholas A Kolaitis
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Lorriana E Leard
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Rupal J Shah
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Mary Ellen Kleinhenz
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Jeffrey Golden
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Legna Betancourt
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Michelle Oyster
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Derek Zaleski
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Joe Adler
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Laurel Kalman
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Priya Balar
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Shreena Patel
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, Villanova, Pennsylvania
| | - Nikhila Medikonda
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA
| | - Brittany Koons
- College of Nursing, Villanova University, Villanova, PA, USA
| | | | - Kenneth E Covinsky
- Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California
| | - John R Greenland
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco CA, USA; Medical Service, San Francisco VA Health Care System, San Francisco, California
| | - Patti K Katz
- Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
McClure P, Tevald M, Zarzycki R, Kantak S, Malloy P, Day K, Shah K, Miller A, Mangione K. The 4-Element Movement System Model to Guide Physical Therapist Education, Practice, and Movement-Related Research. Phys Ther 2021; 101:6106275. [PMID: 33482006 DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzab024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2020] [Accepted: 12/06/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
The movement system has been adopted as the key identity for the physical therapy profession, and recognition of physical therapists' primary expertise in managing movement dysfunction is an important achievement. However, existing movement system models seem inadequate for guiding education, practice, or research. Lack of a clear, broadly applicable model may hamper progress in physical therapists actually adopting this identity. We propose a model composed of 4 primary elements essential to all movement: motion, force, energy, and control. Although these elements overlap and interact, they can each be examined and tested with some degree of specificity. The proposed 4-element model incorporates specific guidance for visual, qualitative assessment of movement during functional tasks that can be used to develop hypotheses about movement dysfunction and serve as a precursor to more quantitative tests and measures. Human movement always occurs within an environmental context and is affected by personal factors, and these concepts are represented within the model. The proposed scheme is consistent with other widely used models within the profession, such as the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and the Patient Management Model. We demonstrate with multiple examples how the model can be applied to a broad spectrum of patients across the lifespan with musculoskeletal, neurologic, and cardiopulmonary disorders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip McClure
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Michael Tevald
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ryan Zarzycki
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Shailesh Kantak
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA.,Moss Rehabilitation Research Institute, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Philip Malloy
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Kristin Day
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Kshamata Shah
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Amy Miller
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Kathleen Mangione
- Arcadia University, Department of Physical Therapy, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Courtwright AM, Zaleski D, Tevald M, Adler J, Singer JP, Cantu EE, A Bermudez C, Diamond JM. Discharge frailty following lung transplantation. Clin Transplant 2019; 33:e13694. [PMID: 31418935 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.13694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2019] [Revised: 07/30/2019] [Accepted: 08/05/2019] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Frailty at listing for lung transplant has been associated with waitlist and post-transplant mortality. Frailty trajectories following transplant, however, have been less well characterized, including whether recipient frailty improves. The objective of this study was to identify prevalence and risk factors for frailty at discharge and to evaluate changes in frail recipients enrolled in an outpatient physical therapy program. METHODS This was a single-center prospective cohort study of lung transplant recipients. Enrollees completed a short physical performance battery (SPPB) to assess frailty at listing and at initial hospital discharge. RESULTS Of the 111 enrolled recipients, none were frail at listing and 18 (16.2%) were prefrail. At discharge, however, 60 (54.1%) patients were frail. Discharge frailty was associated with prefrailty at listing, acute kidney injury post-transplant, and longer intensive care unit stay. Among the 35 patients who were frail at discharge and who were enrolled in an outpatient PT program, the median improvement in SPPB was 6 points (IQR = 5-7 points), and 85.7% became not frail over a median of 6 weeks. CONCLUSION Discharge frailty is common following lung transplantation. In most frail patients, an intensive outpatient physical therapy program is associated with improvement in frailty, as assessed by the SPPB.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew M Courtwright
- Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Derek Zaleski
- Good Shepard Penn Partners, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Michael Tevald
- School of Health Sciences, Arcadia University, Glenside, Pennsylvania
| | - Joe Adler
- Good Shepard Penn Partners, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Jonathan P Singer
- Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Edward E Cantu
- Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | - Joshua M Diamond
- Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| |
Collapse
|