PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 3, 2016Age and Ageing1,373 citationsOpen Access

Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data

View Full Paper
ACAndrew CleggCBChris BatesJYJohn Young

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: frailty is an especially problematic expression of population ageing. International guidelines recommend routine identification of frailty to provide evidence-based treatment, but currently available tools require additional resource. OBJECTIVES: to develop and validate an electronic frailty index (eFI) using routinely available primary care electronic health record data. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: retrospective cohort study. Development and internal validation cohorts were established using a randomly split sample of the ResearchOne primary care database. External validation cohort established using THIN database. PARTICIPANTS: patients aged 65-95, registered with a ResearchOne or THIN practice on 14 October 2008. PREDICTORS: we constructed the eFI using the cumulative deficit frailty model as our theoretical framework. The eFI score is calculated by the presence or absence of individual deficits as a proportion of the total possible. Categories of fit, mild, moderate and severe frailty were defined using population quartiles. OUTCOMES: outcomes were 1-, 3- and 5-year mortality, hospitalisation and nursing home admission. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using bivariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Discrimination was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Calibration was assessed using pseudo-R(2) estimates. RESULTS: we include data from a total of 931,541 patients. The eFI incorporates 36 deficits constructed using 2,171 CTV3 codes. One-year adjusted HR for mortality was 1.92 (95% CI 1.81-2.04) for mild frailty, 3.10 (95% CI 2.91-3.31) for moderate frailty and 4.52 (95% CI 4.16-4.91) for severe frailty. Corresponding estimates for hospitalisation were 1.93 (95% CI 1.86-2.01), 3.04 (95% CI 2.90-3.19) and 4.73 (95% CI 4.43-5.06) and for nursing home admission were 1.89 (95% CI 1.63-2.15), 3.19 (95% CI 2.73-3.73) and 4.76 (95% CI 3.92-5.77), with good to moderate discrimination but low calibration estimates. CONCLUSIONS: the eFI uses routine data to identify older people with mild, moderate and severe frailty, with robust predictive validity for outcomes of mortality, hospitalisation and nursing home admission. Routine implementation of the eFI could enable delivery of evidence-based interventions to improve outcomes for this vulnerable group.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Clegg et al. (2016) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a00122b7ac91c5d2a2d663chttps://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw039
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making.1979 · 2,001 citations
  2. 2The importance of defining periods of complete mortality reporting for research using automated data from primary care2008 · 312 citations
  3. 3R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing2000 · 353,392 citations
  4. 4Frailty in Older Adults: Evidence for a Phenotype2001 · 25,051 citations
  5. 5Predicting risk of emergency admission to hospital using primary care data: derivation and validation of QAdmissions score2013 · 128 citations