Author: Ramosâ€Rincon, Joseâ€Manuel; Morenoâ€Perez, Oscar; Pinargoteâ€Celorio, Hector; Leonâ€Ramirez, Joseâ€Manuel; Andres, Mariano; Reus, Sergio; Herreraâ€GarcÃa, Cristian; MartÃâ€Pastor, Ana; Boix, Vicente; Gil, Joan; Sanchezâ€Martinez, Rosario; Merino, Esperanza
Title: Clinical Frailty Score vs Hospital Frailty Risk Score for predicting mortality and other adverse outcome in hospitalised patients with COVIDâ€19: Spanish case series Cord-id: qgqfwn2t Document date: 2021_7_16
ID: qgqfwn2t
Snippet: OBJECTIVES: Frailty can be used as a predictor of adverse outcomes in people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVIDâ€19). The aim of the study was to analyse the prognostic value of two different frailty scores in patients hospitalised for COVIDâ€19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult (≥18 years) inpatients with COVIDâ€19 and took place from 3 March to 2 May 2020. Patients were categorised by Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) and Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS)
Document: OBJECTIVES: Frailty can be used as a predictor of adverse outcomes in people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVIDâ€19). The aim of the study was to analyse the prognostic value of two different frailty scores in patients hospitalised for COVIDâ€19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult (≥18 years) inpatients with COVIDâ€19 and took place from 3 March to 2 May 2020. Patients were categorised by Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) and Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). The primary outcome was inâ€hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were tocilizumab treatment, length of hospital stay, admission in intensive care unit (ICU) and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Results were analysed by multivariable logistic regression and expressed as odds ratios (ORs), adjusting for age, sex, kidney function and comorbidity. RESULTS: Of the 290 included patients, 54 were frail according to the CFS (≥5 points; prevalence 18.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.4â€23.7) vs 65 by HFRS (≥5 points; prevalence: 22.4%, 95% CI 17.8â€27.7). Prevalence of frailty increased with age according to both measures: 50â€64 years, CFS 1.9% vs HFRS 12.3%; 65â€79 years, CFS 31.5% vs HFRS 40.0%; and ≥80 years, CFS 66.7% vs HFRS 40.0% (P < .001). CFSâ€defined frailty was independently associated with risk of death (OR 3.67, 95% CI 1.49â€9.04) and less treatment with tocilizumab (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08â€0.93). HFRSâ€defined frailty was independently associated with length of hospital stay over 10 days (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.53â€5.44), ICU admission (OR 4.18, 95% CI 1.84â€9.52) and invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 5.93, 95% CI 2.33â€15.10). CONCLUSION: In the spring 2020 wave of the COVIDâ€19 pandemic in Spain, CFSâ€defined frailty was an independent predictor for death, while frailty as measured by the HFRS was associated with length of hospital stay over 10 days, ICU admission and use of invasive mechanical ventilation.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- Try single phrases listed below for: 1
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date