Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet

Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assessing Frailty in the Emergency Department: Feasibility and Performance of the Clinical Frailty Scale in a Swedish context
Linköping University, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Division of Clinical Chemistry and Pharmacology. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Local Health Care Services in Central Östergötland, Department of Emergency Medicine in Linköping.
2025 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

With increasing age, the risk of frailty rises due to deterioration of several physiological systems, reducing the body’s reserve capacity. Recognising this vulnerability during care encounters is important both for understanding prognosis and recovery goals, and for planning care to reduce adverse outcomes.

Traditional emergency department (ED) risk stratification methods often fail to detect risks related to frailty, which is why interest in incorporating frailty assessment in EDs has grown. Several instruments have been developed, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). The CFS has been evaluated across many specialties and is recommended for use in the ED. However, no such research has been conducted in Swedish EDs, and studies under real clinical conditions remain limited.

Therefore, this thesis aims to examine whether the CFS is a useful tool for assessing frailty in older ED patients in Sweden. Specifically, we sought to evaluate its interrater reliability, prognostic accuracy, feasibility and the perspectives of patients.Study I was an observational study assessing IRR by collecting independent CFS assessments from the physician, registered nurse, and assistant nurse responsible for the patient. IRR was assessed in 100 patients, with 300 assessments conducted. IRR was moderate to good, with an ICC of 0.78 (95% CI 0.72–0.84).

Study II examined the prognostic value of the CFS by collecting staff-assessed CFS scores for 1840 older patients. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality, compared between patients with and without frailty. We found that 30-day mortality was significantly higher in patients with frailty compared to those considered robust (7.9% vs 0.9%). Frailty was independently associated with 30-day mortality, with an odds ratio of 6.0 (95% CI 3.0–12.2) after adjusting for confounding factors.

Study III employed a mixed methods design to examine the feasibility of the CFS in an ED setting. We collected data on 4235 ED visits and explored staff experiences through a questionnaire. The overall assessment completion rate was 47%, with more completed in older age groups. The most frequently reported barrier to assessment was high workload. Staff generally perceived the CFS to be relevant, although some questioned its benefits for patients in the ED.

Study IV had a qualitative design and included video-recorded CFS assessments and interviews with patients. A thematic analysis was conducted. Most older patients perceived frailty screening as positive or indifferent, though the experience could further benefit from a better understanding of the assessment’s purpose and consequences. Patients emphasised the importance of relationship-oriented communication, influencing their willingness to share information about their lives.

The CFS demonstrates moderate to good IRR and a strong association with mortality, supporting its usefulness in the ED. However, barriers such as high ED workload and mixed staff perceptions regarding its relevance to ED care impact routine use. Older patients generally respond positively to CFS while it is indicated that it can be further improved with clearer explanations of its purpose and potential consequences.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2025. , p. 48
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 1977
Keywords [en]
Emergency department, Frailty, Geriatrics, Clinical Frailty Scale, Risk stratification
National Category
Gerontology, specialising in Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-213266DOI: 10.3384/9789181180664ISBN: 9789181180657 (print)ISBN: 9789181180664 (electronic)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-213266DiVA, id: diva2:1954872
Public defence
2025-06-04, Berzeliussalen, Building 463, Campus US, Linköping, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2025-04-28 Created: 2025-04-28 Last updated: 2025-04-28Bibliographically approved
List of papers
1. Inter-rater reliability of the Clinical Frailty Scale by staff members in a Swedish emergency department setting
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Inter-rater reliability of the Clinical Frailty Scale by staff members in a Swedish emergency department setting
Show others...
2022 (English)In: Academic Emergency Medicine, ISSN 1069-6563, E-ISSN 1553-2712, Vol. 29, no 12, p. 1431-1437Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction As frailty among the elderly is receiving increasing attention in emergency departments (EDs) around the world, the use of frailty assessment tools is growing. An often used such tool is the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), whose inter-rater reliability has been sparingly investigated in ED settings. No inter-rater reliability study regarding CFS has previously been performed within the Scandinavian ED context. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-rater reliability of the CFS in a Swedish ED setting. Methods This was a prospective observational study conducted at three Swedish EDs. Patients >= 65 years were independently assessed with CFS by their responsible physician, registered nurse, and assistant nurse. Demographic information for each assessor was collected, along with frailty status (frail/not frail) on the basis of clinical judgment. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), whereas agreement of frailty assessed by CFS (dichotomized between frail/not frail, cutoff at >= 5 points) versus solely by clinical judgment was calculated by using cross-tabulation. Results One-hundred patients were included. We found inter-rater reliability to be moderate to good (ICC 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.84), regardless of whether the care team included an emergency physician (ICC 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.83) or an intern/resident from another specialty (ICC 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.89). The agreement of clinically judged frailty compared to frailty according to CFS was 84%. In the opposing cases, staff tended to assess patients as frail to a higher extent using clinical judgment than by applying CFS on the same patient. Conclusions The CFS appears to have a moderate to good inter-rater reliability when used in a clinical ED setting. When guiding clinical decisions, we advise that the CFS score should be discussed within the team. Further research needs to be performed on the accuracy of clinical judgment to identify frailty in ED patients.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley, 2022
National Category
Social and Clinical Pharmacy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-189772 (URN)10.1111/acem.14603 (DOI)000870039100001 ()36200372 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85139988797 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2022-11-08 Created: 2022-11-08 Last updated: 2025-04-28Bibliographically approved
2. Frailty is associated with 30-day mortality: a multicentre study of Swedish emergency departments
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Frailty is associated with 30-day mortality: a multicentre study of Swedish emergency departments
Show others...
2024 (English)In: Emergency Medicine Journal, ISSN 1472-0205, E-ISSN 1472-0213, Vol. 41, no 9, p. 514-519Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background Older patients living with frailty have an increased risk for adverse events. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a 9-point frailty assessment instrument that has shown promise to identify frail emergency department (ED) patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between CFS scores and 30-day mortality in an ED setting when assessments are made by regular ED staff.Method This was a prospective multicentre observational study carried out between May and November 2021 at three EDs in Sweden, where frailty via CFS is routinely assessed by ED staff. All patients >= 65 years of age were eligible for inclusion. Mortality at 7, 30 and 90 days, admission rate, ED and hospital length of stay (LOS) were compared between patients living with frailty (CFS >= 5) and robust patients. Logistic regression was used to adjust for confounders.Results A total of 1840 ED visits of patients aged >= 65 years with CFS assessments done during the study period were analysed, of which 606 (32.9%) were patients living with frailty. Mortality after the index visit was higher in patients living with frailty at 7 days (2.6% vs 0.2%), 30 days (7.9% vs 0.9%) and 90 days (15.5% vs 2.4%). Adjusted ORs for mortality for those with frailty compared with more robust patients were 9.9 (95% CI 2.1 to 46.5) for 7-day, 6.0 (95% CI 3.0 to 12.2) for 30-day and 5.7 (95% CI 3.6 to 9.1) 90-day mortality. Patients living with frailty had higher admission rates, 58% versus 36%, a difference of 22% (95% CI 17% to 26%), longer ED LOS, 5 hours:08 min versus 4 hours:36 min, a difference of 31 min (95% CI 14 to 50), and longer in-hospital LOS, 4.8 days versus 2.7 days, a difference of 2.2 days (95% CI 1.2 to 3.0).Conclusion Patients living with frailty, had significantly higher mortality and admission rates as well as longer ED and in-hospital LOS compared with robust patients. The results confirm the capability of the CFS to risk stratify short-term mortality in older ED patients.Trial registration number NCT04877028.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2024
Keywords
frailty; emergency department; triage; geriatrics; clinical assessment
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-206308 (URN)10.1136/emermed-2023-213444 (DOI)001278779500001 ()39053972 (PubMedID)
Note

Funding Agencies|Region Ostergotland [RO-965951]

Available from: 2024-08-15 Created: 2024-08-15 Last updated: 2025-04-28Bibliographically approved
3. Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
Show others...
2023 (English)In: BMC Emergency Medicine, E-ISSN 1471-227X, Vol. 23, no 1, article id 124Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a frailty assessment tool used to identify frailty in older patients visitingthe emergency department (ED). However, the current understanding of how it is used and accepted in ED clinicalpractice is limited. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of CFS in an ED setting.

Methods :This was a prospective, mixed methods study conducted in three Swedish EDs where CFS had recentlybeen introduced. We examined the completion rate of CFS assessments in relation to patient- and organisationalfactors. A survey on staff experience of using CFS was also conducted. All quantitative data were analyseddescriptively, while free text comments underwent a qualitative content analysis.

Results: A total of 4235 visits were analysed, and CFS assessments were performed in 47%. The completion rate exceeded 50% for patients over the age of 80. Patients with low triage priority were assessed to a low degree (24%). There was a diurnal variation with the highest completion rates seen for arrivals between 6 and 12 a.m. (58%). The survey response rate was 48%. The respondents rated the perceived relevance and the ease of use of the CFS with a median of 5 (IQR 2) on a scale with 7 being the highest. High workload, forgetfulness and critical illness were rankedas the top three barriers to assessment. The qualitative analysis showed that CFS assessments benefit from a clearroutine and a sense of apparent relevance to emergency care.

Conclusion: Most emergency staff perceived CFS as relevant and easy to use, yet far from all older ED patientswere assessed. The most common barrier to assessment was high workload. Measures to facilitate use may includeclarifying the purpose of the assessment with explicit follow-up actions, as well as formulating a clear routine for the assessment.

Registration: The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 2021-06-18 (identifier: NCT04931472).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central (BMC), 2023
Keywords
Clinical frailty scale; Feasibility; Frailty; Implementation; Emergency medicine; Geriatric medicine; Mixed methods
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-198798 (URN)10.1186/s12873-023-00894-8 (DOI)37880591 (PubMedID)
Note

Funding: Open access funding provided by Linköping University

Available from: 2023-10-30 Created: 2023-10-30 Last updated: 2025-04-28

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(5493 kB)138 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 5493 kBChecksum SHA-512
e97a9d09ba5d97b8d5baafb3d79be512ec32a0d3034596d6e5fc4dc519e4eac7b7fd1131273397d0b74fa07058ce7ef0ef4d74037809ee29974b6d9813c73fac
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf
Order online >>

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hörlin, Erika
By organisation
Division of Clinical Chemistry and PharmacologyFaculty of Medicine and Health SciencesDepartment of Emergency Medicine in Linköping
Gerontology, specialising in Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 139 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 925 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf