Prevalence and postdischarge outcomes associated with frailty in medical inpatients: Impact of different frailty definitions

18Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get 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).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McAlister, F. A., Lin, M., & Bakal, J. A. (2019). Prevalence and postdischarge outcomes associated with frailty in medical inpatients: Impact of different frailty definitions. Journal of Hospital Medicine, 14(7), 407–410. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.3174

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free