Impact of frailty on outcomes after discharge in older surgical patients: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>BACKGROUND:</h3> Frailty is a state of vulnerability to diverse stressors. We assessed the impact of frailty on outcomes after discharge in older surgical patients. <h3>METHODS:</h3> We prospectively followed patients 65 years of age or older who underwent emergency abdominal surgery at either of 2 tertiary care centres and who needed assistance with fewer than 3 activities of daily living. Preadmission frailty was defined according to the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale as “well” (score 1 or 2), “vulnerable” (score 3 or 4) or “frail” (score 5 or 6). We assessed composite end points of 30-day and 6-month all-cause readmission or death by multivariable logistic regression. <h3>RESULTS:</h3> Of 308 patients (median age 75 [range 65–94] yr, median Clinical Frailty Score 3 [range 1–6]), 168 (54.5%) were classified as vulnerable and 68 (22.1%) as frail. Ten (4.2%) of those classified as vulnerable or frail received a geriatric consultation. At 30 days after discharge, the proportions of patients who were readmitted or had died were greater among vulnerable patients (<i>n</i> = 27 [16.1%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 4.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29–16.45) and frail patients (<i>n</i> = 12 [17.6%]; adjusted OR 4.51, 95% CI 1.13–17.94) than among patients who were well (<i>n</i> = 3 [4.2%]). By 6 months, the degree of frailty independently and dose-dependently predicted readmission or death: 56 (33.3%) of the vulnerable patients (adjusted OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.01–4.55) and 37 (54.4%) of the frail patients (adjusted OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.32–8.12) were readmitted or had died, compared with 11 (15.3%) of the patients who were well. <h3>INTERPRETATION:</h3> Vulnerability and frailty were prevalent in older patients undergoing surgery and unlikely to trigger specialized geriatric assessment, yet remained independently associated with greater risk of readmission for as long as 6 months after discharge. Therefore, the degree of frailty has important prognostic value for readmission. <h3>Trial registration for primary study</h3> ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02233153
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".