Suppr超能文献

衰弱量表的验证及其与医院衰弱风险评分的比较,以预测老年澳大利亚女性队列中的医院使用情况。

Validation of Frail Scale and comparison with hospital frailty risk score to predict hospital use in a cohort of older Australian women.

机构信息

Australian Health Services Research Institute, Faculty of Business and Law, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Health Plann Manage. 2023 Sep;38(5):1510-1519. doi: 10.1002/hpm.3684. Epub 2023 Jul 14.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

With no standard frailty tool for clinical care, research and policymaking, identifying frail older people is a challenge.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare two validated scales, which are the Frail Scale and Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) for their ability in identifying frailty in older Australian women and predicting hospital use.

METHODS

This study included older Australian women aged 75-95 years, who had unplanned overnight hospital admission as an index admission between 2001 and 2016. Data from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH) were linked with administrative hospital data to calculate HFRS (using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Australia Modification (ICD-10-AM) diagnostic codes) and the Frail Scale (using the ALSWH self-reported survey).

RESULTS

The Frail Scale identified a higher proportion of older frail women (30.54%) compared to the HFRS (23.0%). Frail older women, classified by Frail Scale, were at higher risk of long hospital stay (adjusted odds ratio = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.02-1.60), repeated admission (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.03-1.41) and death (AHR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.45-2.01). HFRS was associated with longer hospital stay and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of older women classified as frail by the Frail Scale tool was higher than women classified as frail by HFRS. The Frail Scale and HFRS were not significantly associated with each other. While both tools were associated with the risk of long hospital stay and mortality, only the Frail Scale predicted the risk of repeated admission.

摘要

简介

由于缺乏用于临床护理、研究和决策制定的标准虚弱工具,因此识别虚弱的老年人是一项挑战。

目的

本研究旨在比较两种经过验证的量表,即虚弱量表和医院衰弱风险评分(HFRS),以评估它们识别澳大利亚老年女性虚弱状况和预测住院需求的能力。

方法

本研究纳入了 2001 年至 2016 年间因计划外过夜住院而接受首次住院的年龄在 75-95 岁的澳大利亚老年女性。使用澳大利亚女性健康纵向研究(ALSWH)的数据与医院管理数据进行关联,以计算 HFRS(使用国际疾病分类第十版修订版澳大利亚修改版(ICD-10-AM)诊断代码)和虚弱量表(使用 ALSWH 自我报告调查)。

结果

与 HFRS 相比(23.0%),虚弱量表识别出的虚弱老年女性比例更高(30.54%)。根据虚弱量表分类的虚弱老年女性住院时间较长(调整优势比[OR] = 1.28,95%置信区间[CI] = 1.02-1.60)、再次入院(调整后危险比[AHR] = 1.30,95%CI = 1.03-1.41)和死亡(AHR = 1.70,95%CI = 1.45-2.01)的风险更高。HFRS 与住院时间延长和死亡率相关。

结论

与 HFRS 相比,使用虚弱量表分类为虚弱的老年女性比例更高。两种工具之间没有显著关联。虽然两种工具都与住院时间延长和死亡率相关,但只有虚弱量表预测了再次入院的风险。

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验