Suppr超能文献

比较两种不同的衰弱筛查量表,以预测老年住院患者因各种原因导致的死亡率。

Comparison of two different frailty screening scales for predicting mortality due to all causes in older inpatients.

机构信息

Mersin City Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatrics - Mersin, Turkey.

Istanbul University, Istanbul Medical School, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatrics - İstanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2024 Aug 16;70(8):e20240250. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20240250. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the relationship between two frailty screening tools and 90-day all-cause mortality in geriatric inpatients.

METHODS

The study included patients aged ≥60 years who were admitted to the geriatrics unit of a university hospital between June 2021 and August 2022 and whose mortality status and duration of hospitalization data were obtained from the Health Ministry System. During hospitalization, the patients were screened using two different frailty scales: the Simpler Modified Fried Frailty Scale (sMFS) and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Patients scoring ≥5 on the CFS and ≥3 on the sMFS were considered frail.

RESULTS

A total of 84 participants with a mean age of 78.3±7.6 years were included in this study, of which 36.9% were male. Of the total, 60.7% and 89.3% were considered frail according to the CFS and sMFS, respectively, and the prevalence of all-cause mortality within 90 days was 19%. A univariate analysis using the Kaplan-Meier survival method revealed CFS scores to be statistically significantly related to 90-day all-cause mortality (p<0.001), while sMFS scores were not found to be statistically significant (p=0.849). Furthermore, a statistically significant relationship was identified between CFS score and all-cause mortality in multivariate analysis with Cox regression analysis [(p<0.001), hazard ratio (HR): 3.078; (95% confidence interval: 1.746-5.425)].

CONCLUSION

An evaluation of frailty in hospitalized older adults using two different scales revealed the CFS to be superior to the sMFS in predicting all-cause mortality within 90 days.

摘要

目的

本研究探讨了两种衰弱筛查工具与老年住院患者 90 天全因死亡率之间的关系。

方法

本研究纳入了 2021 年 6 月至 2022 年 8 月期间入住大学医院老年病房且年龄≥60 岁的患者,其死亡率和住院时间数据来自卫生部系统。住院期间,使用两种不同的衰弱量表对患者进行筛查:简化改良 Fried 衰弱量表(sMFS)和临床衰弱量表(CFS)。CFS 评分≥5 分且 sMFS 评分≥3 分的患者被认为衰弱。

结果

本研究共纳入 84 名平均年龄为 78.3±7.6 岁的患者,其中 36.9%为男性。根据 CFS 和 sMFS,总共有 60.7%和 89.3%的患者被认为衰弱,90 天内全因死亡率为 19%。使用 Kaplan-Meier 生存法进行单变量分析显示,CFS 评分与 90 天全因死亡率显著相关(p<0.001),而 sMFS 评分无显著相关性(p=0.849)。此外,Cox 回归分析的多变量分析显示,CFS 评分与全因死亡率之间存在显著关系[(p<0.001),风险比(HR):3.078;(95%置信区间:1.746-5.425)]。

结论

使用两种不同的量表评估住院老年患者的衰弱情况,结果显示 CFS 在预测 90 天内全因死亡率方面优于 sMFS。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

7
Frailty: implications for clinical practice and public health.虚弱:对临床实践和公共卫生的影响。
Lancet. 2019 Oct 12;394(10206):1365-1375. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31786-6.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验