Validation of the nurse directed frailty assessment tool, to identify patients at risk of emergency department visits, hospitalisation, and 1-year all-cause mortality.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
P H Drop, C van Ham, A C M Mulder, P A Veeken-Dijkstra, J O Daal, L A R Zwart
{"title":"Validation of the nurse directed frailty assessment tool, to identify patients at risk of emergency department visits, hospitalisation, and 1-year all-cause mortality.","authors":"P H Drop, C van Ham, A C M Mulder, P A Veeken-Dijkstra, J O Daal, L A R Zwart","doi":"10.1007/s41999-025-01182-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a validation study of a new frailty assessment that can be administered by outpatient care nurses. The nurse directed frailty assessment (NDFA) encompasses the medical, psychological, social, and functional domain, based on standard care, and can be performed without any specialised equipment. Performance of the NDFA is compared to a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA)-based frailty index (FI), with generalised linear model with reporting of hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). The best cutoff value for the NDFA was assessed by Youden index and the area under the receiver operator curve (ROC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Within 1 year, 15 patients (5%) died, 57 (18%) had an unplanned hospital admission, and 83 (26%) visited the emergency department (ED). Based on the Youden index and ROC curve, the best cutoff value for the NDFA was 4 points. With a binary logistic regression model, an HR of 3.59 (95% CI 1.16-11.15, p < 0.001) was found for mortality. In the general mixed model with Poisson logistic regression, an HR of 1.78 (95% CI 1.06-2.97, p 0.028) was found for unplanned hospital and an HR of 1.87 (95% CI 1.25-2.78, p 0.002) was found for ED visits. The HR and 95% CI of the FI were similar for all three outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The NDFA identifies patients at risk for hospitalisation, emergency department visits, and mortality within 12 months equally well as the FI. Further research is necessary to determine the effectiveness of the NDFA in other settings than the geriatric medicine outpatient population.</p>","PeriodicalId":49287,"journal":{"name":"European Geriatric Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Geriatric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-025-01182-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Methods: This is a validation study of a new frailty assessment that can be administered by outpatient care nurses. The nurse directed frailty assessment (NDFA) encompasses the medical, psychological, social, and functional domain, based on standard care, and can be performed without any specialised equipment. Performance of the NDFA is compared to a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA)-based frailty index (FI), with generalised linear model with reporting of hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). The best cutoff value for the NDFA was assessed by Youden index and the area under the receiver operator curve (ROC).

Results: Within 1 year, 15 patients (5%) died, 57 (18%) had an unplanned hospital admission, and 83 (26%) visited the emergency department (ED). Based on the Youden index and ROC curve, the best cutoff value for the NDFA was 4 points. With a binary logistic regression model, an HR of 3.59 (95% CI 1.16-11.15, p < 0.001) was found for mortality. In the general mixed model with Poisson logistic regression, an HR of 1.78 (95% CI 1.06-2.97, p 0.028) was found for unplanned hospital and an HR of 1.87 (95% CI 1.25-2.78, p 0.002) was found for ED visits. The HR and 95% CI of the FI were similar for all three outcome measures.

Conclusions: The NDFA identifies patients at risk for hospitalisation, emergency department visits, and mortality within 12 months equally well as the FI. Further research is necessary to determine the effectiveness of the NDFA in other settings than the geriatric medicine outpatient population.

验证护士指导的衰弱评估工具,以确定有急诊就诊、住院和1年全因死亡率风险的患者。
方法:这是一个新的虚弱评估的验证研究,可以由门诊护理护士管理。护士指导的衰弱评估(NDFA)包括医学、心理、社会和功能领域,基于标准护理,可以在没有任何专门设备的情况下进行。将NDFA的性能与基于综合老年评估(CGA)的虚弱指数(FI)进行比较,并采用具有报告风险比(HR)和95%置信区间(95% CI)的广义线性模型。采用约登指数(Youden index)和受试者操作曲线下面积(ROC)评价NDFA的最佳截止值。结果:1年内死亡15例(5%),意外住院57例(18%),急诊83例(26%)。根据约登指数和ROC曲线,NDFA的最佳截断值为4点。通过二元logistic回归模型,风险比为3.59 (95% CI 1.16-11.15, p)。结论:NDFA识别出12个月内有住院、急诊就诊和死亡风险的患者与FI一样好。需要进一步的研究来确定NDFA在老年医学门诊人群以外的其他环境中的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Geriatric Medicine
European Geriatric Medicine GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Geriatric Medicine is the official journal of the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS). Launched in 2010, this journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of Geriatric Medicine. The EUGMS is interested in the promotion of Geriatric Medicine in any setting (acute or subacute care, rehabilitation, nursing homes, primary care, fall clinics, ambulatory assessment, dementia clinics..), and also in functionality in old age, comprehensive geriatric assessment, geriatric syndromes, geriatric education, old age psychiatry, models of geriatric care in health services, and quality assurance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信