Association of frailty and mortality in patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kow CS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7836844 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Association of frailty and mortality in patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis.
Kow Chia S CS Hasan Syed S SS Thiruchelvam Kaeshaelya K Aldeyab Mamoon M
British journal of anaesthesia 20201205 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundObservational data during the pandemic have demonstrated mixed associations between frailty and mortality.AimTo examine associations between frailty and short-term mortality in patients hospitalised with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase and the COVID-19 living systematic review from 1 December 2019 to 15 July 2021. Studies reporting mortality and frailty scores in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (age ≥18 years) were included. Data on patient demographics, short-term mortality (in hospital or within 30 days), intensive care unit (ICU) admission and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were extracted. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsTwenty-five studies reporting 34 628 patients were included. Overall, 26.2% (n = 9061) died. Patients who died were older (76.7 ± 9.6 vs 69.2 ± 13.4), more likely male (risk ratio (RR) = 1.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-1.11) and had more comorbidities. Fifty-eight percent of patients were frail. Adjusting for age, there was no difference in short-term mortality between frail and non-frail patients (RR = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.84-1.28). The non-frail patients were commonly admitted to ICU (27.2% (4256/15639) vs 29.1% (3567/12274); P = 0.011) and had a higher mortality risk (RR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.30-2.03) than frail patients. Among patients receiving IMV, there was no difference in mortality between frail and non-frail (RR = 1.62; 95% CI 0.93-2.77).ConclusionThis systematic review did not demonstrate an independent association between frailty status and short-term mortality in patients with COVID-19. Patients with frailty were less commonly admitted to ICU and non-frail patients were more likely to receive IMV and had higher mortality risk. This finding may be related to allocation decisions for patients with frailty amidst the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9314619 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA large number of studies have explored the association between frailty and mortality among COVID-19 patients, with inconsistent results. The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesize the evidence on this issue.MethodsThree databases, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, from inception to 20th January 2021 were searched for relevant literature. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess quality bias, and STATA was employed to pool the effect size by a random effects model. Additionally, potential publication bias and sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsFifteen studies were included, with a total of 23,944 COVID-19 patients, for quantitative analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence of frailty was 51% (95% CI: 44-59%). Patients with frailty who were infected with COVID-19 had an increased risk of mortality compared to those without frailty, and the pooled hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) were 1.99 (95% CI: 1.66-2.38) and 2.48 (95% CI: 1.78-3.46), respectively. In addition, subgroup analysis based on population showed that the pooled ORs for hospitalized patients in eight studies and nursing home residents in two studies were 2.62 (95% CI: 1.68-4.07) and 2.09 (95% CI: 1.40-3.11), respectively. Subgroup analysis using the frailty assessment tool indicated that this association still existed when using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) (assessed in 6 studies, pooled OR = 2.88, 95% CI: 1.52-5.45; assessed in 5 studies, pooled HR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.66-2.38) and other frailty tools (assessed in 4 studies, pooled OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.81-2.16). In addition, these significant positive associations still existed in the subgroup analysis based on study design and geographic region.ConclusionOur study indicates that frailty is an independent predictor of mortality among patients with COVID-19. Thus, frailty could be a prognostic factor for clinicians to stratify high-risk groups and remind doctors and nurses to perform early screening and corresponding interventions urgently needed to reduce mortality rates in patients infected by SARS-CoV-2.
| S-EPMC7968577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe present study aimed to analyze the impact of frailty on mortality risk among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsLiterature searches were conducted using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles reporting the association between frailty and mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled effects.ResultsA total of 21 studies with 26,652 hospitalized patients were included. Sixteen studies used the Clinical Frailty Score (CFS), and five used other frailty assessment tools. The pooled estimates of frailty in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were 51.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 39.9-62.9%]. In the CFS group, frail patients experienced a higher rate of short-term mortality than non-frail patients [odds ratio (OR) =3.0; 95% CI: 2.3-3.9; I2=72.7%; P<0.001]. In the other tools group, frail patients had a significantly increased short-term mortality risk compared with non-frail patients (OR =2.4; 95% CI: 1.4-4.1; P=0.001). Overall, a higher short-term mortality risk was observed for frail patients than non-frail patients (OR =2.8; 95% CI: 2.3-3.5; P<0.001). In older adults, frail patients had a higher rate of short-term mortality than non-frail patients (OR =2.3; 95% CI: 1.8-2.9; P<0.001).ConclusionsCompared to non-frail hospitalized patients with COVID-19, frail patients suffered a higher risk of all-cause mortality, and this result was also found in the older adult group.
| S-EPMC8908186 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization guidelines did not make a recommendation on use of remdesivir based on disease severity. Little is known regarding effectiveness of remdesivir in critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. This has led to a state of dilemma for doctors leaving them skeptical of whether they should continue to recommend the drug or not.Materials and methodsA systematic search adhering to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted from inception until February 20, 2020. Electronic bibliographic databases (PubMed, Cochrane database, Scopus, Embase) were included. Using dichotomous data for select values, the unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated applying Mantel Haenszel (M-H) using random-effects model. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality in ventilated and non-ventilated patients.ResultsThe Remdesivir arm was associated with similar rates of 28-day all-cause mortality (OR: 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80 - 1.08; P = 0.33). Remdesivir was not found to be favorable for ventilated patients. Non ventilated COVID-19 patients showed a significant lower in-hospital mortality rate as compared with patients requiring mechanical ventilatory support (OR: 6.86, 95% CI: 5.39 - 268.74; P <0.0001).ConclusionNon-ventilated patients were associated with significant lower all-cause mortality rates. Prudent use of remdesivir is recommended in critically ill COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8511372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe concept of frailty provides an age-independent, easy-to-use tool for risk stratification. We aimed to summarize the evidence on the efficacy of frailty tools in risk assessment in COVID-19 patients.MethodsThe protocol was registered (CRD42021241544). Studies reporting on frailty in COVID-19 patients were eligible. The main outcomes were mortality, length of hospital stay (LOH) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in frail and non-frail COVID-19 patients. Frailty was also compared in survivors and non-survivors. Five databases were searched up to 24th September 2021. The QUIPS tool was used for the risk of bias assessment. Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 and χ2 tests.ResultsFrom 3640 records identified, 54 were included in the qualitative and 42 in the quantitative synthesis. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was used in 46 studies, the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) by 4, the Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) by 3 and three studies used other scores. We found that patients with frailty (CFS 4-9 or HFRS ≥ 5) have a higher risk of mortality (CFS: OR: 3.12; CI 2.56-3.81; HFRS OR: 1.98; CI 1.89-2.07). Patients with frailty (CFS 4-9) were less likely to be admitted to ICU (OR 0.28, CI 0.12-0.64). Quantitative synthesis for LOH was not feasible. Most studies carried a high risk of bias.ConclusionsAs determined by CFS, frailty is strongly associated with mortality; hence, frailty-based patient management should be included in international COVID-19 treatment guidelines. Future studies investigating the role of frailty assessment on deciding ICU admission are strongly warranted.
| S-EPMC8858439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe clinical frailty scale (CFS) was used as a triage tool for medical decision making during the COVID-19 pandemic. The CFS has been posed as a suitable risk marker for in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. We evaluated whether the CFS is associated with mortality 24 months after hospitalisation for COVID-19.MethodsThe COvid MEdicaTion (COMET) study is an international, multicentre, observational cohort study, including adult patients hospitalised for COVID-19 between March 2020-July 2020. Patients' characteristics, prescribed medication, clinical characteristics, and CFS were collected at admission, survival data were collected 24 months after hospitalisation. Multivariable cox proportional hazard models stratified by age (<65 and ≥65 years), and adjusted for covariates (age, sex, number of drugs, and types of drug class as a proxy for comorbidities) were used to study the association between the CFS and 24-month mortality after hospitalisation.ResultsIn this study, 1238 fit (CFS 1-3), 478 mildly frail (CFS 4-5), and 235 frail (CFS 6-9) patients were included for baseline analysis (median age 68 years (IQR 58-78); 58.5 % male). Frailty was associated with an increased risk of 24-month mortality after hospitalisation in older patients (HR 1.91, 95 % CI [1.17-3.12]), in younger adults a trend was seen (HR 3.13, 95 % CI [0.86-11.36]).ConclusionThe results suggest that the CFS is an indicator for mortality 24 months after hospitalisation in COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC11648057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is limited evidence about the prognostic utility of right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed the association between RVD and mortality in COVID-19 patients. We searched electronic databases from inception to February 15, 2021. RVD was defined based on the following echocardiographic variables: tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), tricuspid S' peak systolic velocity, fractional area change (FAC), and right ventricular free wall longitudinal strain (RVFWLS). All meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Nineteen cohort studies involving 2307 patients were included. The mean age ranged from 59 to 72 years and 65% of patients were male. TAPSE (mean difference [MD], -3.13 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.08--2.19), tricuspid S' peak systolic velocity (MD, -0.88 cm/s; 95% CI, -1.68 to -0.08), FAC (MD, -3.47%; 95% CI, -6.21 to -0.72), and RVFWLS (MD, -5.83%; 95% CI, -7.47--4.20) were significantly lower in nonsurvivors compared to survivors. Each 1 mm decrease in TAPSE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.37), 1% decrease in FAC (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04-1.14), and 1% increase in RVFWLS (aHR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.19-1.48) were independently associated with higher mortality. RVD was significantly associated with higher mortality using unadjusted risk ratio (2.05; 95% CI, 1.27-3.31), unadjusted hazard ratio (3.37; 95% CI, 1.72-6.62), and adjusted hazard ratio (aHR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.52-4.96). Our study shows that echocardiographic parameters of RVD were associated with an increased risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8495092 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe effect of ivermectin on mortality in patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been investigated in many studies. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to investigate the overall effect of ivermectin on the risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and preprint repository databases (up to February 28, 2021). Random-effects and inverse variance heterogeneity meta-analysis were used to pool the odds ratio of individual trials. The risk of bias was appraised using Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials.ResultsSix randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis with a total of 658 patients who were randomized to receive ivermectin and 597 patients randomized in the control group who did not receive ivermectin. Of six trials, four had an overall high risk of bias. The estimated effect of ivermectin indicated mortality benefits (pooled odds ratio = 0.21; 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.42, n = 1255), with some evidence against the hypothesis of 'no significant difference' at the current sample size.ConclusionWe observed a preliminary beneficial effect on mortality associated with ivermectin use in patients with COVID-19 that warrants further clinical evidence in appropriately designed large-scale randomized controlled trials.
| S-EPMC8005369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Convalescent plasma (CCP) has been used for treating some infectious diseases; however, the efficacy of CCP in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains controversial. The aim of this research was to assess the efficacy of CCP as an adjunctive treatment in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and MedRix were searched for potentially relevant articles. All included papers were assessed for the quality using modified Jadad scale and Newcastle-Ottawa scale for randomized controlled trial (RCT) and non - RCT, respectively. We used a Q test and Egger test to assess the heterogeneity and publication bias among studies, respectively. Mortality rates between patients treated with standard treatment and standard treatment with CCP were compared using a Z test. Results: A total of 12 papers consisting of three cross-sectional studies, one prospective study, five retrospective studies, and three RCT studies were included in our analysis. Of them, a total of 1,937 patients treated with CCP and 3,405 patients without CCP were included. The risk of mortality was 1.92-fold higher in patients without CCP compared to patients treated with CCP (OR: 1.92; 95%CI: 1.33, 2.77; p=0.0005). In severe COVID-19 sub-group analysis, we found that patients without CCP had a 1.32 times higher risk of mortality than those treated with CCP (OR: 1.32; 95%CI: 1.09, 1.60; p=0.0040). Conclusions: CCP, as adjunctive therapy, could reduce the mortality rate among COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8182694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesFrailty leaves older adults vulnerable to adverse health outcomes. Frailty assessment is recommended by multiple COVID-19 guidelines to inform care and resource allocation. We aimed to identify, describe, and synthesize studies reporting the association of frailty with outcomes (informed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Triple Aim [health, resource use, and experience]) in individuals with COVID-19.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.SettingStudies reporting associations between frailty and outcomes in the setting of COVID-19 diagnosis.ParticipantsAdults with COVID-19.MeasurementsFollowing review of titles, abstracts and full text, we included 52 studies that contained 118,373 participants with COVID-19. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic studies tool. Our primary outcome was mortality, secondary outcomes included delirium, intensive care unit admission, need for ventilation and discharge location. Where appropriate, random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool adjusted and unadjusted effect measures by frailty instrument.ResultsThe Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was the most used frailty instrument. Mortality was reported in 37 studies. After confounder adjustment, frailty identified using the CFS was significantly associated with mortality in COVID-19 positive patients (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49-2.14; hazard ratio 1.87, 95% CI 1.33-2.61). On an unadjusted basis, frailty identified using the CFS was significantly associated with increased odds of delirium and reduced odds of intensive care unit admission. Results were generally consistent using other frailty instruments. Patient-reported, cost and experience outcomes were rarely reported.ConclusionFrailty is associated with a substantial increase in mortality risk in COVID-19 patients, even after adjustment. Delirium risk is also increased. Frailty assessment may help to guide prognosis and individualized care planning, but data relating frailty status to patient-reported outcomes are urgently needed to provide a more comprehensive overview of outcomes relevant to older adults.
| S-EPMC8242611 | biostudies-literature