The trajectory of very old critically ill patients

The aging of the population of the United States and a concern for the well-being of older people have hastened the emergence of measures of functional health. Among these, measures of basic activities of daily living, mobility, and instrumental activities of daily living have been particularly useful and are now widely available. Many are defined in similar terms and are built into available comprehensive instruments. Although studies of reliability and validity continue to be needed, especially of predictive validity, there is documented evidence that these measures of self-maintaining function can be reliably used in clinical evaluations as well as in program evaluations and in planning. Current scientific evidence indicates that evaluation by these measures helps to identify problems that require treatment or care. Such evaluation also produces useful information about prognosis and is important in monitoring the health and illness of elderly people.

The prevalence of frailty at population level is unclear. We examined this in population-based studies, investigating sources of heterogeneity. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library databases were searched for observational population-level studies published between 1 January 1998 and 1 April 2020, including individuals aged ≥50 years, identified using any frailty measure. Prevalence estimates were extracted independently, assessed for bias and analysed using a random-effects model. In total, 240 studies reporting 265 prevalence proportions from 62 countries and territories, representing 1,755,497 participants, were included. Pooled prevalence in studies using physical frailty measures was 12% (95% CI = 11–13%; n = 178), compared with 24% (95% CI = 22–26%; n = 71) for the deficit accumulation model (those using a frailty index, FI). For pre-frailty, this was 46% (95% CI = 45–48%; n = 147) and 49% (95% CI = 46–52%; n = 29), respectively. For physical frailty, the prevalence was higher among females, 15% (95% CI = 14–17%; n = 142), than males, 11% (95% CI = 10–12%; n = 144). For studies using a FI, the prevalence was also higher in females, 29% (95% CI = 24–35%; n = 34) versus 20% (95% CI = 16–24%; n = 34), for males. These values were similar for pre-frailty. Prevalence increased according to the minimum age at study inclusion. Analysing only data from nationally representative studies gave a frailty prevalence of 7% (95% CI = 5–9%; n = 46) for physical frailty and 24% (95% CI = 22–26%; n = 44) for FIs. Population-level frailty prevalence varied by classification and sex. Data were heterogenous and limited, particularly from nationally representative studies making the interpretation of differences by geographic region challenging. Common methodological approaches to gathering data are required to improve the accuracy of population-level prevalence estimates. PROSPERO-CRD42018105431.

Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome characterized by loss of physiologic and cognitive reserves that confers vulnerability to adverse outcomes. We determined the prevalence, correlates and outcomes associated with frailty among adults admitted to intensive care. We prospectively enrolled 421 critically ill adults aged 50 or more at 6 hospitals across the province of Alberta. The primary exposure was frailty, defined by a score greater than 4 on the Clinical Frailty Scale. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures included adverse events, 1-year mortality and quality of life. The prevalence of frailty was 32.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 28.3%-37.5%). Frail patients were older, were more likely to be female, and had more comorbidities and greater functional dependence than those who were not frail. In-hospital mortality was higher among frail patients than among non-frail patients (32% v. 16%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.81, 95% CI 1.09-3.01) and remained higher at 1 year (48% v. 25%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.82, 95% CI 1.28-2.60). Major adverse events were more common among frail patients (39% v. 29%; OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.01-2.37). Compared with nonfrail survivors, frail survivors were more likely to become functionally dependent (71% v. 52%; OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.03-4.89), had significantly lower quality of life and were more often readmitted to hospital (56% v. 39%; OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.22-3.23) in the 12 months following enrolment. Frailty was common among critically ill adults aged 50 and older and identified a population at increased risk of adverse events, morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis of frailty could improve prognostication and identify a vulnerable population that might benefit from follow-up and intervention.