Frailty as a trigger for goals-of-care discussions in rapid response calls: A single-centre retrospective cohort study.

Aust Crit Care

Department of Intensive Care, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria, Australia; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Dandenong Hospital, Monash Health, Dandenong, Victoria, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Epworth HealthCare, Geelong, Victoria, Australia; Department of Medicine, Peninsula Clinical School, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia; Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Published: August 2024

Background: Timely goals-of-care (GOC) discussions are essential for end-of-life planning, particularly during acute hospital admissions, where ambiguity often persists. Frailty, prevalent in the ageing population and linked to adverse outcomes, underscores the need to align treatment strategies with quality of life. Recognising frailty as a trigger for GOC discussions during rapid response calls (RRCs) is critical for efficient resource management and improving patient outcomes.

Methods: This single-centre retrospective cohort study included all hospitalised patients aged ≥65 years admitted between September 2021 and June 2023 who experienced an RRC. Frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) during the RRC. The primary outcome was to investigate whether frailty, specifically assessed by the CFS as screened during an RRC, could be a suitable clinical trigger for initiating GOC discussions. We also aimed to identify the proportion of patients with frailty (CFS score: ≥5) and predictors at the time of RRC, resulting in recommendations for GOC discussions.

Results: Among 4954 patients, 1685 (34.0%) were classified as frail (CFS score: ≥5). Recommendations increased with frailty levels (nonfrail [CFS score: 1-4]: 6.6%, mildly frail [CFS score: 5]: 19.3%, moderate-to-severely frail [CFS score: 6-9]: 32.2%; p < 0.001). Frailty independently increased the probability of GOC recommendations during an RRC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.71). The CFS cut-off point for GOC recommendations was ≥5. The presence of frailty was associated with higher odds of receiving GOC recommendations for mildly frail (CFS score: 5; odds ratio [OR] = 2.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.96-3.27) and moderate-to-severely frail (CFS score: 6-9; OR = 4.69; 95% confidence interval: 3.81-5.78) compared to nonfrail patients.

Conclusion: Frailty, identified during an RRC, served as a robust trigger for GOC recommendations, highlighting the importance of tailored proactive discussions before episodes of deterioration. Higher levels of frailty (CFS score: ≥5) demonstrate practical markers for aiding clinicians with proactive GOC discussions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2024.06.011DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

goc discussions
12
[cfs score
12
frailty
8
frailty trigger
8
discussions rapid
8
rapid response
8
response calls
8
single-centre retrospective
8
retrospective cohort
8
cohort study
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!