Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
BMJ Open. 2022 Jul 27;12(7):e061951. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061951.
Despite growing evidence, uncertainty persists about which frailty assessment tools are best suited for routine perioperative care. We aim to understand which frailty assessment tools perform well and are feasible to implement.
Using a registered protocol following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA), we will conduct a scoping review informed by the Joanna Briggs Institute Guide for Scoping Reviews and reported using PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews recommendations. We will develop a comprehensive search strategy with information specialists using the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies checklist, and implement this across relevant databases from 2005 to 13 October 2021 and updated prior to final review publication. We will include all studies evaluating a frailty assessment tool preoperatively in patients 65 years or older undergoing intracavitary, non-cardiac surgery. We will exclude tools not assessed in clinical practice, or using laboratory or radiologic values alone. After pilot testing, two reviewers will independently assess information sources for eligibility first by titles and abstracts, then by full-text review. Two reviewers will independently chart data from included full texts using a piloted standardised electronic data charting. In this scoping review process, we will (1) index frailty assessment tools evaluated in the preoperative clinical setting; (2) describe the level of investigation supporting each tool; (3) describe useability of each tool and (4) describe direct comparisons between tools. The results will inform ready application of frailty assessment tools in routine clinical practice by surgeons and other perioperative clinicians.
Ethic approval is not required for this secondary data analysis. This scoping review will be published in a peer-review journal. Results will be used to inform an ongoing implementation study focused on geriatric surgery to overcome the current lack of uptake of older adult-oriented care recommendations and ensure broad impact of research findings.
尽管有越来越多的证据,但对于哪些虚弱评估工具最适合常规围手术期护理仍存在不确定性。我们旨在了解哪些虚弱评估工具表现良好且易于实施。
我们将根据循证医学系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)的注册协议,使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所(Joanna Briggs Institute)的指导进行范围审查,并根据扩展的 PRISMA 建议进行报告。我们将与信息专家一起制定一项全面的搜索策略,使用同行评审电子搜索策略检查表,并在 2005 年至 2021 年 10 月 13 日期间在相关数据库中实施,并在最终审查出版前进行更新。我们将包括所有在 65 岁及以上接受腔内非心脏手术的患者中术前评估虚弱评估工具的研究。我们将排除未在临床实践中评估的工具,或仅使用实验室或放射学值的工具。经过试点测试后,两名审查员将独立评估信息来源的资格,首先是通过标题和摘要,然后是通过全文审查。两名审查员将使用试点标准化电子数据图表工具,独立从纳入的全文中提取数据。在这个范围审查过程中,我们将:(1)索引在术前临床环境中评估的虚弱评估工具;(2)描述每项工具的调查水平;(3)描述每项工具的可用性;(4)描述工具之间的直接比较。结果将为外科医生和其他围手术期临床医生在常规临床实践中应用虚弱评估工具提供信息。
本次二次数据分析不需要伦理批准。本范围审查将在同行评审期刊上发表。结果将用于指导一项正在进行的老年手术实施研究,以克服目前对老年患者护理建议接受度低的问题,并确保研究结果的广泛影响。