Prevalence and Postdischarge Outcomes Associated with Frailty in Medical Inpatients: Impact of Different Frailty Definitions.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30897053.
- Also identified by DOI 10.12788/jhm.3174.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
We compared prevalence estimates and prognostication if frailty were defined using the face-to-face Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) or the administrative-data-derived Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). We evaluated 489 adults from a prospective cohort study of medical patients being discharged back to the community; 276 (56%) were deemed frail (214 [44%] on the HFRS and 161 [33%] on the CFS), but only 99 (20%) met both frailty definitions (kappa 0.24, 95% CI 0.16-0.33). Patients classified as frail on the CFS exhibited significantly higher 30-day readmission/death rates, 19% versus 10% for those not frail (aOR [adjusted odds ratio] 2.53, 95% CI 1.40-4.57) and 21% versus 6% for those aged >65 years (aOR 4.31, 95% CI 1.80-10.31). Patients with HFRS-defined frailty exhibited higher 30-day readmission/death rates that were not statistically significant (16% vs 11%, aOR 1.62 [95% CI 0.95-2.75] in all adults and 14% vs 11%, aOR 1.24 [95% CI 0.58-2.83] in those aged >65 years).
Medical subject headings
- Frail Elderly
- Patient Readmission
- Risk Assessment