Helena A Ferris, Mary E Walsh, Niamh A Merriman, Louise Brent, Pamela Hickey, Niamh O ' Regan, Tara Coughlan, Roman Romero-Ortuno
{"title":"识别髋部骨折急性住院患者的虚弱:临床虚弱量表和爱尔兰髋部骨折数据库虚弱指数在预测不良后果方面是否具有可比性?","authors":"Helena A Ferris, Mary E Walsh, Niamh A Merriman, Louise Brent, Pamela Hickey, Niamh O ' Regan, Tara Coughlan, Roman Romero-Ortuno","doi":"10.1007/s41999-025-01268-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Frail older adults are at increased risk of adverse outcomes after hip fracture. We compared the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the Irish Hip Fracture Database Frailty Index (IHFD FI) in predicting hospital outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary analysis of national clinical audit data from two trauma units was conducted. The CFS and IHFD FI were derived from routinely collected data. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the predictive value of age, sex, ASA grade, plus either frailty tool for the following outcomes: delirium (positive 4AT and/or clinical diagnosis), inpatient mortality, prolonged length of stay (LOS ≥ 30 days) and discharge home within 14 days. Predictive performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 1,388 patients discharged between 1st January 2022 and 31st December 2023 (mean age 80.0, 68.4% female). Delirium occurred in 39.1%, inpatient mortality in 5.2%, prolonged LOS in 22.2% and 33.6% were discharged home within 14 days. CFS data were available for 84.4% and IHFD FI for 86.5%. When added to age, sex and ASA, the CFS outperformed the IHFD FI for predicting delirium (AUC 0.816 vs. 0.790), while the IHFD FI was better for mortality (AUC 0.778 vs. 0.744). Both tools performed similarly for prolonged LOS and discharge home.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both the CFS and IHFD FI were predictive of outcomes. However, the CFS demonstrated superior predictive value for delirium during admission. Prospective collection of the CFS is recommended to enhance the identification of patients at risk of delirium and to support timely clinical interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49287,"journal":{"name":"European Geriatric Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying frailty in acutely hospitalised patients with hip fracture: are the clinical frailty scale and irish hip fracture database frailty index comparable for predicting adverse outcomes?\",\"authors\":\"Helena A Ferris, Mary E Walsh, Niamh A Merriman, Louise Brent, Pamela Hickey, Niamh O ' Regan, Tara Coughlan, Roman Romero-Ortuno\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41999-025-01268-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Frail older adults are at increased risk of adverse outcomes after hip fracture. We compared the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the Irish Hip Fracture Database Frailty Index (IHFD FI) in predicting hospital outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary analysis of national clinical audit data from two trauma units was conducted. The CFS and IHFD FI were derived from routinely collected data. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the predictive value of age, sex, ASA grade, plus either frailty tool for the following outcomes: delirium (positive 4AT and/or clinical diagnosis), inpatient mortality, prolonged length of stay (LOS ≥ 30 days) and discharge home within 14 days. Predictive performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 1,388 patients discharged between 1st January 2022 and 31st December 2023 (mean age 80.0, 68.4% female). Delirium occurred in 39.1%, inpatient mortality in 5.2%, prolonged LOS in 22.2% and 33.6% were discharged home within 14 days. CFS data were available for 84.4% and IHFD FI for 86.5%. When added to age, sex and ASA, the CFS outperformed the IHFD FI for predicting delirium (AUC 0.816 vs. 0.790), while the IHFD FI was better for mortality (AUC 0.778 vs. 0.744). Both tools performed similarly for prolonged LOS and discharge home.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both the CFS and IHFD FI were predictive of outcomes. However, the CFS demonstrated superior predictive value for delirium during admission. Prospective collection of the CFS is recommended to enhance the identification of patients at risk of delirium and to support timely clinical interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49287,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Geriatric Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"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/s41999-025-01268-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Geriatric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-025-01268-y","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
摘要
目的:体弱的老年人髋部骨折后不良后果的风险增加。我们比较了临床虚弱量表(CFS)和爱尔兰髋部骨折数据库虚弱指数(IHFD FI)在预测医院预后方面的作用。方法:对两个创伤科室的国家临床审计资料进行二次分析。CFS和IHFD FI来自常规收集的数据。多变量logistic回归评估了年龄、性别、ASA等级以及衰弱工具对以下结果的预测价值:谵妄(4AT阳性和/或临床诊断)、住院死亡率、住院时间延长(LOS≥30天)和14天内出院。采用曲线下面积(AUC)评价预测效果。结果:该研究纳入了2022年1月1日至2023年12月31日出院的1388例患者(平均年龄80.0岁,女性68.4%)。发生谵妄的占39.1%,住院死亡的占5.2%,延长的占22.2%,14天内出院的占33.6%。CFS数据为84.4%,IHFD FI为86.5%。当考虑到年龄、性别和ASA时,CFS在预测谵妄方面优于IHFD FI (AUC 0.816比0.790),而IHFD FI在预测死亡率方面优于IHFD FI (AUC 0.778比0.744)。两种工具对于长期LOS和出院家庭的效果相似。结论:CFS和IHFD FI均可预测预后。然而,CFS在入院时表现出对谵妄的优越预测价值。建议对CFS进行前瞻性收集,以加强对谵妄风险患者的识别,并支持及时的临床干预。
Identifying frailty in acutely hospitalised patients with hip fracture: are the clinical frailty scale and irish hip fracture database frailty index comparable for predicting adverse outcomes?
Purpose: Frail older adults are at increased risk of adverse outcomes after hip fracture. We compared the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the Irish Hip Fracture Database Frailty Index (IHFD FI) in predicting hospital outcomes.
Methods: A secondary analysis of national clinical audit data from two trauma units was conducted. The CFS and IHFD FI were derived from routinely collected data. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the predictive value of age, sex, ASA grade, plus either frailty tool for the following outcomes: delirium (positive 4AT and/or clinical diagnosis), inpatient mortality, prolonged length of stay (LOS ≥ 30 days) and discharge home within 14 days. Predictive performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC).
Results: The study included 1,388 patients discharged between 1st January 2022 and 31st December 2023 (mean age 80.0, 68.4% female). Delirium occurred in 39.1%, inpatient mortality in 5.2%, prolonged LOS in 22.2% and 33.6% were discharged home within 14 days. CFS data were available for 84.4% and IHFD FI for 86.5%. When added to age, sex and ASA, the CFS outperformed the IHFD FI for predicting delirium (AUC 0.816 vs. 0.790), while the IHFD FI was better for mortality (AUC 0.778 vs. 0.744). Both tools performed similarly for prolonged LOS and discharge home.
Conclusion: Both the CFS and IHFD FI were predictive of outcomes. However, the CFS demonstrated superior predictive value for delirium during admission. Prospective collection of the CFS is recommended to enhance the identification of patients at risk of delirium and to support timely clinical interventions.
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.