Mehraneh Khalighi, Amy C Thomas, Karl J Brown, Katherine C Ritchey
{"title":"使用临床风险分析指数完成供方和患者完成术前虚弱筛查的一致性:横断面问卷研究。","authors":"Mehraneh Khalighi, Amy C Thomas, Karl J Brown, Katherine C Ritchey","doi":"10.2196/66440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Frailty is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. Preoperative screening and management of persons with frailty improves postoperative outcomes. The Clinical Risk Analysis Index (RAI-C) is a validated provider-based screening tool for assessing frailty in presurgical populations. Patient self-screening for frailty may provide an alternative to provider-based screening if resources are limited; however, the agreement between these 2 methods has not been previously explored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of our study was to examine provider-completed versus patient-completed RAI-C assessments to identify areas of disagreement between the 2 methods and inform best practices for RAI-C screening implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Orthopedic physicians and physician assistants completed the RAI-C assessment on veterans aged 65 years and older undergoing elective total joint arthroplasty (eg, total hip or knee arthroplasty) and documented scores into the electronic health record during their preoperative clinic evaluation. Participants were then mailed the same RAI-C form after preoperative evaluation and returned responses to study coordinators. Agreement between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments and differences within individual domains were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 49 participants aged 65 years and older presenting for total joint arthroplasty underwent RAI-C assessment between November 2022 and August 2023. In total, 41% (20/49) of participants completed and returned an independent postvisit RAI-C assessment before surgery and within 180 days of their initial evaluation. There was a moderate but statistically significant correlation between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments (r=0.62; 95% CI 0.25-0.83; P=.003). Provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments resulted in the same frailty classification in 60% (12/20) of participants, but 40% (8/20) of participants were reclassified to a more frail category based on patient-completed assessment. Agreement was the lowest between provider-completed and patient-completed screening questions regarding memory and activities of daily living.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RAI-C had moderate agreement when completed by providers versus the participants themselves, with more than a third of patient-completed screens resulting in a higher frailty classification. Future studies will need to explore the differences between and accuracy of RAI-C screening approaches to inform best practices for preoperative RAI-C assessment implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73557,"journal":{"name":"JMIR perioperative medicine","volume":"8 ","pages":"e66440"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11851030/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agreement Between Provider-Completed and Patient-Completed Preoperative Frailty Screening Using the Clinical Risk Analysis Index: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.\",\"authors\":\"Mehraneh Khalighi, Amy C Thomas, Karl J Brown, Katherine C Ritchey\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/66440\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Frailty is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. Preoperative screening and management of persons with frailty improves postoperative outcomes. The Clinical Risk Analysis Index (RAI-C) is a validated provider-based screening tool for assessing frailty in presurgical populations. Patient self-screening for frailty may provide an alternative to provider-based screening if resources are limited; however, the agreement between these 2 methods has not been previously explored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of our study was to examine provider-completed versus patient-completed RAI-C assessments to identify areas of disagreement between the 2 methods and inform best practices for RAI-C screening implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Orthopedic physicians and physician assistants completed the RAI-C assessment on veterans aged 65 years and older undergoing elective total joint arthroplasty (eg, total hip or knee arthroplasty) and documented scores into the electronic health record during their preoperative clinic evaluation. Participants were then mailed the same RAI-C form after preoperative evaluation and returned responses to study coordinators. Agreement between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments and differences within individual domains were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 49 participants aged 65 years and older presenting for total joint arthroplasty underwent RAI-C assessment between November 2022 and August 2023. In total, 41% (20/49) of participants completed and returned an independent postvisit RAI-C assessment before surgery and within 180 days of their initial evaluation. There was a moderate but statistically significant correlation between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments (r=0.62; 95% CI 0.25-0.83; P=.003). Provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments resulted in the same frailty classification in 60% (12/20) of participants, but 40% (8/20) of participants were reclassified to a more frail category based on patient-completed assessment. Agreement was the lowest between provider-completed and patient-completed screening questions regarding memory and activities of daily living.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RAI-C had moderate agreement when completed by providers versus the participants themselves, with more than a third of patient-completed screens resulting in a higher frailty classification. Future studies will need to explore the differences between and accuracy of RAI-C screening approaches to inform best practices for preoperative RAI-C assessment implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR perioperative medicine\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"e66440\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11851030/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR perioperative medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/66440\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR perioperative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/66440","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:虚弱与术后发病率和死亡率相关。术前筛查和管理虚弱的人可以改善术后结果。临床风险分析指数(RAI-C)是一种有效的基于提供者的筛查工具,用于评估术前人群的脆弱性。在资源有限的情况下,患者自我虚弱筛查可以作为基于医生的筛查的替代方案;然而,这两种方法之间的一致性以前没有被探索过。目的:我们研究的目的是检查提供者完成和患者完成的rac评估,以确定两种方法之间的分歧,并为rac筛查实施提供最佳实践。方法:骨科医师和医师助理对65岁及以上接受选择性全关节置换术(如全髋关节或全膝关节置换术)的退伍军人进行RAI-C评估,并在术前临床评估时将评分记录到电子健康记录中。参与者在术前评估后邮寄相同的RAI-C表格,并将回复回复给研究协调员。比较了提供者完成的和患者完成的rac评估之间的一致性以及个别领域内的差异。结果:共有49名65岁及以上的参与者在2022年11月至2023年8月期间接受了全关节置换术的rac评估。总共有41%(20/49)的参与者在手术前和初次评估的180天内完成并返回独立的术后RAI-C评估。提供者完成的RAI-C评估与患者完成的RAI-C评估之间存在中度但有统计学意义的相关性(r=0.62;95% ci 0.25-0.83;P = .003)。提供者完成的和患者完成的RAI-C评估在60%(12/20)的参与者中导致相同的虚弱分类,但40%(8/20)的参与者根据患者完成的评估被重新分类为更虚弱的类别。在关于记忆和日常生活活动的筛查问题上,由提供者完成和患者完成的一致性最低。结论:由提供者完成的RAI-C与参与者自己完成的RAI-C有中等程度的一致性,超过三分之一的患者完成的筛查导致更高的虚弱分类。未来的研究将需要探索rac筛查方法之间的差异和准确性,以告知术前rac评估实施的最佳实践。
Agreement Between Provider-Completed and Patient-Completed Preoperative Frailty Screening Using the Clinical Risk Analysis Index: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.
Background: Frailty is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. Preoperative screening and management of persons with frailty improves postoperative outcomes. The Clinical Risk Analysis Index (RAI-C) is a validated provider-based screening tool for assessing frailty in presurgical populations. Patient self-screening for frailty may provide an alternative to provider-based screening if resources are limited; however, the agreement between these 2 methods has not been previously explored.
Objective: The objective of our study was to examine provider-completed versus patient-completed RAI-C assessments to identify areas of disagreement between the 2 methods and inform best practices for RAI-C screening implementation.
Methods: Orthopedic physicians and physician assistants completed the RAI-C assessment on veterans aged 65 years and older undergoing elective total joint arthroplasty (eg, total hip or knee arthroplasty) and documented scores into the electronic health record during their preoperative clinic evaluation. Participants were then mailed the same RAI-C form after preoperative evaluation and returned responses to study coordinators. Agreement between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments and differences within individual domains were compared.
Results: A total of 49 participants aged 65 years and older presenting for total joint arthroplasty underwent RAI-C assessment between November 2022 and August 2023. In total, 41% (20/49) of participants completed and returned an independent postvisit RAI-C assessment before surgery and within 180 days of their initial evaluation. There was a moderate but statistically significant correlation between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments (r=0.62; 95% CI 0.25-0.83; P=.003). Provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments resulted in the same frailty classification in 60% (12/20) of participants, but 40% (8/20) of participants were reclassified to a more frail category based on patient-completed assessment. Agreement was the lowest between provider-completed and patient-completed screening questions regarding memory and activities of daily living.
Conclusions: RAI-C had moderate agreement when completed by providers versus the participants themselves, with more than a third of patient-completed screens resulting in a higher frailty classification. Future studies will need to explore the differences between and accuracy of RAI-C screening approaches to inform best practices for preoperative RAI-C assessment implementation.