医院衰弱风险评分的外部验证及与医院-患者一年死亡率风险评分的比较,以预测老年住院患者的结局:一项回顾性队列研究。

External validation of the Hospital Frailty Risk Score and comparison with the Hospital-patient One-year Mortality Risk Score to predict outcomes in elderly hospitalised patients: a retrospective cohort study.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

Department of Epidemiology & Community Medicine, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 Apr;28(4):284-288. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008661. Epub 2018 Oct 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Frailty is an important prognostic factor in hospitalised patients but typically requires face-to-face assessment by trained observers to detect. Thus, frail patients are not readily apparent from a systems perspective for those interested in implementing quality improvement measures to optimise their outcomes. This study was designed to externally validate and compare two recently described tools using administrative data as potential markers for frailty: the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) and the Hospital-patient One-year Mortality Risk (HOMR) Score.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Ontario, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients over 75 with at least one urgent non-psychiatric hospitalisation between 2004 and 2010.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prolonged hospital length of stay (>10 days), 30-day mortality after admission and 30-day postdischarge rates of urgent readmission or emergency department (ED) visits.

RESULTS

In 452 785 patients (25.9% with intermediate or high-risk HFRS), increased HFRS was associated with higher Charlson scores, older age and decreased likelihood of baseline independence. Patients with high or intermediate HFRS had significantly increased risks of prolonged hospitalisation (70.0% (OR 8.64, 95%  CI 8.30 to 8.99) or 49.7% (OR 3.66, 95%  CI 3.60 to 3.71) vs 21.3% in low-risk HFRS group) and 30-day mortality (15.5% (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.33) or 16.8% (OR 1.39, 95%  CI 1.36 to 1.41) vs 12.7% in low-risk), but risks of 30-day readmission (10.0% (OR 0.74, 95%  CI 0.69 to 0.79) and 11.2% (OR 0.84, 95%  CI 0.82 to 0.86) vs 13.1%) or ED visit (7.3% (OR 0.41, 95%  CI 0.38 to 0.45) and 11.1% (OR 0.66, 95%  CI 0.38 to 0.45) vs 16.0%). Although only loosely associated (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.265, p<0.0001), both the HFRS and HOMR Score were independently associated with each outcome-HFRS was more strongly associated with prolonged length of stay (C-statistic 0.71) and HOMR Score was more strongly associated with 30-day mortality (C-statistic 0.71). Both poorly predicted 30-day readmissions (C-statistics 0.52 for HFRS and 0.54 for HOMR Score).

CONCLUSIONS

The HFRS best identified hospitalised older patients at higher risk of prolonged length of stay and the HOMR score better predicted 30-day mortality. However, neither score was suitable for predicting risk of readmission or ED visit in the 30 days after discharge. Thus, a single score is inadequate to prognosticate for all outcomes associated with frailty.

摘要

目的

衰弱是住院患者的一个重要预后因素,但通常需要经过经过培训的观察者进行面对面评估才能发现。因此,对于那些有兴趣实施质量改进措施以优化其结果的人来说,从系统角度来看,衰弱患者并不明显。本研究旨在使用行政数据对两种最近描述的工具(医院衰弱风险评分(HFRS)和医院-患者一年死亡率风险评分(HOMR 评分))进行外部验证和比较,将其作为衰弱的潜在标志物。

设计

回顾性队列研究。

设置

加拿大安大略省。

参与者

2004 年至 2010 年间至少有一次紧急非精神病住院的所有 75 岁以上患者。

主要观察指标

住院时间延长(>10 天)、入院后 30 天死亡率和 30 天出院后紧急再入院或急诊(ED)就诊率。

结果

在 452785 名患者(25.9%的患者 HFRS 风险为中高危)中,HFRS 评分增加与 Charlson 评分更高、年龄更大和基线独立性降低有关。HFRS 评分高或中危的患者住院时间延长的风险显著增加(70.0%(OR 8.64,95%CI 8.30 至 8.99)或 49.7%(OR 3.66,95%CI 3.60 至 3.71),而低危 HFRS 组的风险为 21.3%)和 30 天死亡率(15.5%(OR 1.27,95%CI 1.20 至 1.33)或 16.8%(OR 1.39,95%CI 1.36 至 1.41),而低危组的风险为 12.7%),但 30 天再入院(10.0%(OR 0.74,95%CI 0.69 至 0.79)和 11.2%(OR 0.84,95%CI 0.82 至 0.86),而低危组的风险为 13.1%)或 ED 就诊(7.3%(OR 0.41,95%CI 0.38 至 0.45)和 11.1%(OR 0.66,95%CI 0.38 至 0.45),而低危组的风险为 16.0%)的风险较低。虽然两者相关性不强(Pearson 相关系数 0.265,p<0.0001),但 HFRS 和 HOMR 评分均与每个结局独立相关-HFRS 与住院时间延长的相关性更强(C 统计量为 0.71),HOMR 评分与 30 天死亡率的相关性更强(C 统计量为 0.71)。两者对 30 天再入院的预测能力均较差(HFRS 的 C 统计量为 0.52,HOMR 评分的 C 统计量为 0.54)。

结论

HFRS 最能识别住院的老年患者中风险更高的患者,其住院时间延长,而 HOMR 评分更能预测 30 天死亡率。然而,这两种评分都不适合预测出院后 30 天内再入院或 ED 就诊的风险。因此,单一评分不足以预测与衰弱相关的所有结局。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索