Dataset Information

Geriatric assessment is superior to oncologists' clinical judgement in identifying frailty.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Frailty is a syndrome associated with increased vulnerability and an important predictor of outcomes in older cancer patients. Systematic assessments to identify frailty are seldom applied, and oncologists' ability to identify frailty is scarcely investigated.

Methods

We compared oncologists' classification of frailty (onc-frail) based on clinical judgement with a modified geriatric assessment (mGA), and investigated associations between frailty and overall survival. Patients ⩾70 years referred for medical cancer treatment were eligible. mGA-frailty was defined as impairment in at least one of the following: daily activities, comorbidity, polypharmacy, physical function or at least one geriatric syndrome (cognitive impairment, depression, malnutrition, falls).

Results

Three hundred and seven patients were enroled, 288 (94%) completed the mGA, 286 (93%) were rated by oncologists. Median age was 77 years, 56% had metastases, 85% performance status (PS) 0-1. Overall, 104/286 (36%) were onc-frail and 140/288 (49%) mGA-frail, the agreement was fair (kappa value 0.30 (95% CI 0.19; 0.41)), and 67 mGA-frail patients who frequently had localised disease, good PS and received curative treatment, were missed by the oncologists. Only mGA-frailty was independently prognostic for survival (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.14; 2.27; P=0.007).

Conclusions

Systematic assessment of geriatric domains is needed to aid oncologists in identifying frail patients with poor survival.

SUBMITTER: Kirkhus L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5558687 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Geriatric assessment is superior to oncologists' clinical judgement in identifying frailty.

Kirkhus Lene L Šaltytė Benth Jūratė J Rostoft Siri S Grønberg Bjørn Henning BH Hjermstad Marianne J MJ Selbæk Geir G Wyller Torgeir B TB Harneshaug Magnus M Jordhøy Marit S MS

British journal of cancer 20170629 4

<h4>Background</h4>Frailty is a syndrome associated with increased vulnerability and an important predictor of outcomes in older cancer patients. Systematic assessments to identify frailty are seldom applied, and oncologists' ability to identify frailty is scarcely investigated.<h4>Methods</h4>We compared oncologists' classification of frailty (onc-frail) based on clinical judgement with a modified geriatric assessment (mGA), and investigated associations between frailty and overall survival. Pa ...[more]

PMID: 28664916

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGeriatric assessment (GA) is recommended to detect vulnerabilities for elderly cancer patients. To assess whether results of GA actually influence the treatment recommendations, we conducted a case vignette-based study in medical oncologists.Materials and methodsSeventy oncologists gave their medical treatment recommendations for a maximum of 4 out of 10 gastrointestinal cancer patients in three steps: (i) based on tumor findings alone to simulate the guideline recommendation for a '50-year-old standard patient without comorbidities'; (ii) for the same situation in elderly patients (median age 77.5 years) according to the comorbidities, laboratory values and a short video simulating the clinical consultation; and (iii) after the results of a full GA including interpretation aid [Barthel Index, Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), Geriatric 8 (G8), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Timed Get Up and Go (TGUG), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), stair climb test].ResultsData on 164 treatment recommendations were analyzed. The recommendations had a significantly higher variance for elderly patients than for 'standard' patients (944 versus 602, P < 0.0001) indicating a lower agreement between oncologists. Knowledge on GA had marginal influence on the treatment recommendation or its variance (944 versus 940, P = 0.92). There was no statistically significant influence of the working place or the years of experience in oncology on the variance of recommendations. The geriatric tools were rated approximately two times higher as being 'meaningful' (53%) and 'useful for the presented cases' (49%) than they were 'used in clinical practice' (19%). The most commonly used geriatric tool in patient care was the MNA (30%).ConclusionsThe higher variance of treatment recommendations indicates that it is less likely for elderly patients to get the optimal recommendation. Although the proposed therapeutic regimen varied higher in elderly patients and the oncologists rated the GA results as 'useful', the GA results did not influence the individual recommendations or its variance. Continuing education on GA and research on implementation into clinical practice are needed.

Project description:BackgroundDemographic changes have led to an increase in the number of elderly frail persons and, consequently, systematic geriatric assessment is more important than ever. Frailty Indexes (FI) may be particularly useful to discriminate between various degrees of frailty but are not routinely assessed due, at least in part, to the large number of deficits assessed (from 30 to 70). Therefore, we have developed a new, more concise FI for rapid geriatric assessment (RGA)-the Frail-VIG index ("VIG" is the Spanish/Catalan abbreviation for Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment), which contains 22 simple questions that assess 25 different deficits. Here we describe this FI and report its ability to predict mortality at 24 months.MethodsProspective, observational, longitudinal study of geriatric patients followed for 24 months or until death. The study participants were patients (n = 590) admitted to the Acute Geriatric Unit at the at the University Hospital of Vic (Barcelona) during the year 2014. Participants were classified into one of seven groups based on their Frail-VIG score (0-0.15; 0.16-0.25; 0.26-0.35; 0.36-0.45; 0.46-0.55; 0.56-0.65; and 0.66-1). Survival curves for these groups were compared using the log-rank test. ROC curves were used to assess the index's capacity to predict mortality at 24 months.ResultsMean (standard deviation) patient age was 86.4 (5.6) years. The 24-month mortality rate was 57.3% for the whole sample. Significant between-group (deceased vs. living) differences (p < 0.05) were observed for most index variables. Survival curves for the seven Frail-VIG groups differed significantly (X2 = 433.4, p < 0.001), with an area under the ROC curve (confidence interval) of 0.90 (0.88-0.92) at 12 months and 0.85 (0.82-0.88) at 24 months. Administration time for the Frail-VIG index ranged from 5 to 10 min.ConclusionsThe Frail-VIG index, which requires less time to administer than previously validated FIs, presents a good discriminative capacity for the degree of frailty and a high predictive capacity for mortality in the present cohort. Although more research is needed to confirm the validity of this instrument in other populations and settings, the Frail-VIG may provide clinicians with a RGA method and also a reliable tool to assess frailty in routine practice.

Project description:Background: Frailty is characterized by loss of biological reserves and is associated with an increased risk of adverse health outcomes. Frailty can be operationalized using a Frailty Index (FI) based on the accumulation of health deficits; items under health evaluation in the well-established Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) have been used to generate an FI-CGA. Traditionally, constructing the FI-CGA has relied on paper-based recording and manual data processing. As this can be time-consuming and error-prone, it limits widespread uptake of this proven type of frailty assessment. Here, we report the development of an electronic tool, the eFI-CGA, for use on personal computers by frontline healthcare providers, to collect CGA data and automate FI-CFA calculation. The ultimate goal is to support early identification and management of frailty at points-of-care, and make uptake in Electronic Medical Records (EMR) feasible and transparent. Methods: An electronic CGA (eCGA) form was implemented to operate on Microsoft's WinForms platform and coded using C# programming language. Users complete the eCGA form, from which items under the CGA evaluation are automatically retrieved and processed to output an eFI-CGA score. A user-friendly interface and secured data saving methods were implemented. The software was debugged and tested using systematically designed simulation data, addressing different logic, syntax, and application errors, and then tested with clinical assessment. The user manual and manual scoring were used as ground truth to compare eFI-CGA input and automated eFI score calculations. Frontline health-provider user feedback was incorporated to improve the end-user experience. Results: The Standalone eFI-CGA software tool was developed and optimized for use on personal computers. The user interface adapted the design of paper-based CGA form to facilitate familiarity for clinical users. Compared to known scores, the software tool generated eFI-CGA scores with 100% accuracy to four decimal places. The eFI-CGA allowed secure data storage and retrieval of multiple types, including user input, completed eCGA form, coded items, and calculated eFI-CGA scores. It also permitted recording of actions requiring clinical follow-up, facilitating care planning. Application bugs were identified and resolved at various stages of the implementation, resulting in efficient system performance. Discussion: Accurate, robust, and reliable computerized frailty assessments are needed to promote effective frailty assessment and management, as a key tool in health care systems facing up to frailty. Our research has enabled the delivery of the standalone eFI-CGA software technology to empower effective frailty assessment and management by various healthcare providers at points-of-care, facilitating integrated care of older adults.

Project description:ObjectiveGiven the aging population and growing burden of frailty, we conducted this scoping review to describe the available literature regarding the use and impact of frailty assessment tools in the assessment and care of emergency department (ED) patients older than 60 years.MethodsA search was made of the available literature using the Covidence system using various search terms. Inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed literature focusing on frailty screening tools used for a geriatric population (60+ years of age) presenting to EDs. An additional search of PubMed, EBSCO, and CINAHL for articles published in the last 5 years was conducted toward the end of the review process (January 2023) to search specifically for literature describing interventions for frailty, yielding additional articles for review. Exclusion criteria comprised articles focusing on an age category other than geriatric and care environments outside the emergency care setting.ResultsA total of 135 articles were screened for inclusion and 48 duplicates were removed. Of the 87 remaining articles, 20 were deemed irrelevant, leaving 67 articles for full-text review. Twenty-eight were excluded for not meeting inclusion criteria, leaving 39 full-text studies. Use of frailty screening tools were reported in the triage, care, and discharge decision-making phases of the ED care trajectory, with varying reports of usefulness for clinical decision-making.ConclusionThe literature reports tools, scales, and instruments for identifying frailty in older patients at ED triage; multiple frailty scores or tools exist with varying levels of utilization. Interventions for frailty directed at the ED environment were scant. Further research is needed to determine the usefulness of frailty identification in the context of emergency care, the effects of care delivery interventions or educational initiatives for front-line medical professionals on patient-oriented outcomes, and to ensure these initiatives are acceptable for patients.

Dataset Information

Geriatric assessment is superior to oncologists' clinical judgement in identifying frailty.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Geriatric assessment is superior to oncologists' clinical judgement in identifying frailty.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets