Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the improvement in one-year mortality prediction after adding a 2-min cognitive screening to a simple 1-min frailty detection instrument. Secondary outcomes were new activities of daily living (ADL) disability and falls. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A geriatric day-hospital for intermediate care. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 701 older adults with an acute or decompensated disease (79.5 (8.3) years, 64% female). MEASUREMENTS: A rapid and simple frailty evaluation was performed using the FRAIL questionnaire. The presence of cognitive impairment was defined by previous diagnosis of dementia or a score of five or less on an education-corrected 10-point cognitive screening tool. RESULTS: Frail participants with normal (hazard risk [HR] 4.0, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.73-9.25) and impaired cognition had a higher risk of death (HR 4.38, 95% CI, 1.95-9.87) than robust participants. The presence of cognitive impairment increased the risk of death in prefrail (HR 3.60, 95% CI, 1.55-8.34) and robust participants (HR 3.49, 95% CI, 1.22-9.96). Cognitive impairment was associated with an increased risk of incident ADL disability in all frailty categories. The presence of cognitive impairment was associated with a significantly higher risk of fall in robust seniors. The predictive accuracy of the FRAIL scale was lower than expected (between 0.58 and 0.69), and a small improvement was observed after adding the cognitive screening (between 0.61 and 0.72). CONCLUSION: Despite of significant results in predicting relevant clinical events, the present combination of the FRAIL and 10-CS scales may not be ideal in clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aprahamian et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: