Heim Noor, van Fenema Ester M, Weverling-Rijnsburger Annelies W E, Tuijl Jolien P, Jue Peter, Oleksik Anna M, Verschuur Margot J, Haverkamp Jasper S, Blauw Gerard Jan, van der Mast Roos C, Westendorp Rudi G J
Department of Gerontology and Geriatrics, LUMC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Department of Psychiatry, LUMC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Age Ageing. 2015 Mar;44(2):239-44. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afu187. Epub 2014 Nov 28.
Screening for frailty might help to prevent adverse outcomes in hospitalised older adults.
To identify the most predictive and efficient screening tool for frailty.
Two consecutive observational prospective cohorts in four hospitals in the Netherlands.
Patients aged ≥70 years, electively or acutely hospitalised for ≥2 days.
Screening instruments included in the Dutch Safety Management Programme [VeiligheidsManagementSysteem (VMS)] on four geriatric domains (ADL, falls, undernutrition and delirium) were used and the Identification of Seniors At Risk, the 6-item Cognitive Impairment Test and the Mini-Mental State Examination were assessed. Three months later, adverse outcomes including functional decline, high-healthcare demand or death were determined. Correlation and regression tree analyses were performed and predictive capacities were assessed.
Follow-up data were available of 883 patients. All screening instruments were similarly predictive for adverse outcome (predictive power 0.58-0.66), but the percentage of positively screened patients (13-72%), sensitivity (24-89%) and specificity (35-91%) highly differed. The strongest predictive model for frailty was scoring positive on ≥3 VMS domains if aged 70-80 years; or being aged ≥80 years and scoring positive on ≥1 VMS domains. This tool classified 34% of the patients as frail with a sensitivity of 68% and a specificity of 74%. Comparable results were found in the validation cohort.
The VMS-tool plus age (VMS+) offers an efficient instrument to identify frail hospitalised older adults at risk for adverse outcome. In clinical practice, it is important to weigh costs and benefits of screening given the rather low-predictive power of screening instruments.
筛查衰弱可能有助于预防住院老年人出现不良后果。
确定最具预测性和高效的衰弱筛查工具。
荷兰四家医院的两个连续观察性前瞻性队列。
年龄≥70岁、择期或急症住院≥2天的患者。
使用荷兰安全管理计划[安全管理系统(VMS)]中包含的关于四个老年领域(日常生活活动能力、跌倒、营养不良和谵妄)的筛查工具,并对老年人风险识别、6项认知障碍测试和简易精神状态检查表进行评估。三个月后,确定包括功能衰退、高医疗需求或死亡在内的不良后果。进行相关性和回归树分析,并评估预测能力。
有883例患者的随访数据。所有筛查工具对不良后果的预测能力相似(预测力为0.58 - 0.66),但筛查呈阳性的患者百分比(13% - 72%)、敏感性(24% - 89%)和特异性(35% - 91%)差异很大。对于衰弱最强的预测模型是:70 - 80岁的患者在≥3个VMS领域得分呈阳性;或年龄≥80岁且在≥1个VMS领域得分呈阳性。该工具将34%的患者归类为衰弱,敏感性为68%,特异性为74%。在验证队列中发现了类似结果。
VMS工具加年龄(VMS +)提供了一种有效的工具,可识别有不良后果风险的住院衰弱老年人。在临床实践中,鉴于筛查工具的预测能力较低,权衡筛查的成本和效益很重要。