Dataset Information

Development and validation of a Hospital Frailty Risk Score focusing on older people in acute care settings using electronic hospital records: an observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Older people are increasing users of health care globally. We aimed to establish whether older people with characteristics of frailty and who are at risk of adverse health-care outcomes could be identified using routinely collected data.

Methods

A three-step approach was used to develop and validate a Hospital Frailty Risk Score from International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnostic codes. First, we carried out a cluster analysis to identify a group of older people (≥75 years) admitted to hospital who had high resource use and diagnoses associated with frailty. Second, we created a Hospital Frailty Risk Score based on ICD-10 codes that characterised this group. Third, in separate cohorts, we tested how well the score predicted adverse outcomes and whether it identified similar groups as other frailty tools.

Findings

In the development cohort (n=22 139), older people with frailty diagnoses formed a distinct group and had higher non-elective hospital use (33·6 bed-days over 2 years compared with 23·0 bed-days for the group with the next highest number of bed-days). In the national validation cohort (n=1 013 590), compared with the 429 762 (42·4%) patients with the lowest risk scores, the 202 718 (20·0%) patients with the highest Hospital Frailty Risk Scores had increased odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio 1·71, 95% CI 1·68-1·75), long hospital stay (6·03, 5·92-6·10), and 30-day readmission (1·48, 1·46-1·50). The c statistics (ie, model discrimination) between individuals for these three outcomes were 0·60, 0·68, and 0·56, respectively. The Hospital Frailty Risk Score showed fair overlap with dichotomised Fried and Rockwood scales (kappa scores 0·22, 95% CI 0·15-0·30 and 0·30, 0·22-0·38, respectively) and moderate agreement with the Rockwood Frailty Index (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0·41, 95% CI 0·38-0·47).

Interpretation

The Hospital Frailty Risk Score provides hospitals and health systems with a low-cost, systematic way to screen for frailty and identify a group of patients who are at greater risk of adverse outcomes and for whom a frailty-attuned approach might be useful.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research.

SUBMITTER: Gilbert T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5946808 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMost claims-based frailty instruments have been designed for group stratification of older populations according to the risk of adverse health outcomes and not frailty itself. We aimed to develop and validate a tool based on one-year hospital discharge data for stratification on Fried's frailty phenotype (FP).MethodsWe used a three-stage development/validation approach. First, we created a clinical knowledge-driven electronic frailty score (eFS) calculated as the number of deficient organs/systems among 18 critical ones identified from the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnoses coded in the year before FP assessment. Second, for eFS development and internal validation, we linked individual records from the Lc65+ cohort database to inpatient discharge data from Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) for the period 2004-2015. The development/internal validation sample included community-dwelling, non-institutionalised residents of Lausanne (Switzerland) recruited in the Lc65+ cohort in three waves (2004, 2009, and 2014), aged 65-70 years at enrolment, and hospitalised at the CHUV at least once in the year preceding the FP assessment. Using this sample, we selected the best performing model for predicting the dichotomised FP, with the eFS or ICD-10-based variables as predictors. Third, we conducted an external validation using 2016 Swiss nationwide hospital discharge data and compared the performance of the eFS model in predicting 13 adverse outcomes to three models relying on well-designed and validated claims-based scores (Claims-based Frailty Index, Hospital Frailty Risk Score, Dr Foster Global Frailty Score).FindingsIn the development/internal validation sample (n = 469), 14·3% of participants (n = 67) were frail. Among 34 models tested, the best-subsets logistic regression model with four predictors (age and sex at FP assessment, time since last hospital discharge, eFS) performed best in predicting the dichotomised FP (area under the curve=0·71; F1 score=0·39) and one-year adverse health outcomes. On the external validation sample (n = 54,815; 153 acute care hospitals), the eFS model demonstrated a similar performance to the three other claims-based scoring models. According to the eFS model, the external validation sample showed an estimated prevalence of 56·8% (n = 31,135) of frail older inpatients at admission.InterpretationThe eFS model is an inexpensive, transportable and valid tool allowing reliable group stratification and individual prioritisation for comprehensive frailty assessment and may be applied to both hospitalised and community-dwelling older adults.FundingThe study received no external funding.

Project description:ObjectiveTo create an electronic frailty index (eFRAGICAP) using electronic health records (EHR) in Catalunya (Spain) and assess its predictive validity with a two-year follow-up of the outcomes: homecare need, institutionalization and mortality in the elderly. Additionally, to assess its concurrent validity compared to other standardized measures: the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC).MethodsThe eFRAGICAP was based on the electronic frailty index (eFI) developed in United Kingdom, and includes 36 deficits identified through clinical diagnoses, prescriptions, physical examinations, and questionnaires registered in the EHR of primary health care centres (PHC). All subjects > 65 assigned to a PHC in Barcelona on 1st January, 2016 were included. Subjects were classified according to their eFRAGICAP index as: fit, mild, moderate or severe frailty. Predictive validity was assessed comparing results with the following outcomes: institutionalization, homecare need, and mortality at 24 months. Concurrent validation of the eFRAGICAP was performed with a sample of subjects (n = 333) drawn from the global cohort and the CFS and RISC. Discrimination and calibration measures for the outcomes of institutionalization, homecare need, and mortality and frailty scales were calculated.Results253,684 subjects had their eFRAGICAP index calculated. Mean age was 76.3 years (59.5% women). Of these, 41.1% were classified as fit, and 32.2% as presenting mild, 18.7% moderate, and 7.9% severe frailty. The mean age of the subjects included in the validation subsample (n = 333) was 79.9 years (57.7% women). Of these, 12.6% were classified as fit, and 31.5% presented mild, 39.6% moderate, and 16.2% severe frailty. Regarding the outcome analyses, the eFRAGICAP was good in the detection of subjects who were institutionalized, required homecare assistance, or died at 24 months (c-statistic of 0.841, 0.853, and 0.803, respectively). eFRAGICAP was also good in the detection of frail subjects compared to the CFS (AUC 0.821) and the RISC (AUC 0.848).ConclusionThe eFRAGICAP has a good discriminative capacity to identify frail subjects compared to other frailty scales and predictive outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic health record (EHR)-based computable phenotype algorithms allow researchers to efficiently identify a large virtual cohort of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) patients. Built upon existing algorithms, we refined, improved, and validated an HIV phenotype algorithm using data from the OneFlorida Data Trust, a repository of linked claims data and EHRs from its clinical partners, which provide care to over 15 million patients across all 67 counties in Florida.MethodsOur computable phenotype examined information from multiple EHR domains, including clinical encounters with diagnoses, prescription medications, and laboratory tests. To identify an HIV case, the algorithm requires the patient to have at least one diagnostic code for HIV and meet one of the following criteria: have 1+ positive HIV laboratory, have been prescribed with HIV medications, or have 3+ visits with HIV diagnostic codes. The computable phenotype was validated against a subset of clinical notes.ResultsAmong the 15+ million patients from OneFlorida, we identified 61,313 patients with confirmed HIV diagnosis. Among them, 8.05% met all four inclusion criteria, 69.7% met the 3+ HIV encounters criteria in addition to having HIV diagnostic code, and 8.1% met all criteria except for having positive laboratories. Our algorithm achieved higher sensitivity (98.9%) and comparable specificity (97.6%) relative to existing algorithms (77-83% sensitivity, 86-100% specificity). The mean age of the sample was 42.7 years, 58% male, and about half were Black African American. Patients' average follow-up period (the time between the first and last encounter in the EHRs) was approximately 4.6 years. The median number of all encounters and HIV-related encounters were 79 and 21, respectively.ConclusionBy leveraging EHR data from multiple clinical partners and domains, with a considerably diverse population, our algorithm allows more flexible criteria for identifying patients with incomplete laboratory test results and medication prescribing history compared with prior studies.