A 10-min Targeted Geriatric Assessment Predicts Mortality in Fast-Paced Acute Care Settings: A Prospective Cohort Study

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_ALIBERTI_A_10min_Targeted_Geriatric_Assessment_Predicts_Mortality_in_2019.PDF (384.96 KB)
Citações na Scopus
4
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2019
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
SPRINGER FRANCE
Autores
COVINSKY, K. E.
LEE, S. J.
Citação
JOURNAL OF NUTRITION HEALTH & AGING, v.23, n.3, p.286-290, 2019
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
ObjectivesTo estimate whether a 10-minute Targeted Geriatric Assessment (10-TaGA) adds utility to sociodemographic characteristics and comorbidities in predicting one-year mortality in busy acute care settings. We have also compared the performance of 10-TaGA with the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) scale.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingGeriatric day hospital specializing in acute care in BrazilParticipants751 older adults aged 79.4 8.4 years (64% female), presenting non-surgical, medical illness requiring hospital-level care (e.g., intravenous therapy, laboratory test, radiology) for 12 hours.MeasurementsThe 10-TaGA, an easy-to-administer screening tool based on the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA), provided a measure of cumulative deficits ranging from 0 (no deficits) to 1 (highest deficit) on admission. Standard risk factors, including sociodemographics (age, gender, ethnicity, income) and the Charlson comorbidity index, were evaluated. The ISAR, a well-validated screening tool, was used for comparison.ResultsDuring one year of follow-up, 130 (17%) participants died. Compared to the ISAR, 10-TaGA offered better accuracy in identifying older patients at risk of death (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: [AUC] 0.70 vs 0.65; P = 0.03). In a Cox regression model adjusted for sociodemographics and comorbidities, each 0.1 increment in the 10-TaGA score (range 0-1) was associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio = 1.42, 95% confidence interval 1.27-1.59). The addition of 10-TaGA markedly improved the discrimination of the model, which already incorporated standard risk factors (AUC 0.76 vs 0.71; P = 0.005); adding ISAR (AUC 0.73 vs 0.71; P = 0.09) did not have this marked effect.ConclusionThe 10-TaGA is an independent predictor of one-year mortality in acute care patients. This multidimensional screening tool offers better accuracy than ISAR when differentiating between older people at low and high risk of death in healthcare settings where providers have limited time and resources.
Palavras-chave
Comprehensive geriatric assessment, screening tool, acute care, geriatric day hospital, prognosis
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/31621
Referências
  1. Aliberti MJR, 2016, J AM GERIATR SOC, V64, P2149, DOI 10.1111/jgs.14342
  2. Aliberti MJR, 2018, J AM GERIATR SOC
  3. Amblas-Novellas J, 2018, BMC GERIATR, V18, DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0718-2
  4. Apolinario D, 2016, INT J GERIATR PSYCH, V31, P4, DOI 10.1002/gps.4282
  5. Conroy SP, 2011, AGE AGEING, V40, P436, DOI 10.1093/ageing/afr060
  6. DELONG ER, 1988, BIOMETRICS, V44, P837, DOI 10.2307/2531595
  7. Di Bari M, 2012, J GERONTOL A-BIOL, V67, P544, DOI 10.1093/gerona/glr209
  8. Ellis G, 2014, CLIN INTERV AGING, V9, P2033, DOI 10.2147/CIA.S29662
  9. Frenkel WJ, 2014, J AM GERIATR SOC, V62, P342, DOI 10.1111/jgs.12635
  10. Graf CE, 2011, AGING CLIN EXP RES, V23, P244, DOI 10.3275/7284
  11. Graf CE, 2010, J AM GERIATR SOC, V58, P2032, DOI 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.03090.x
  12. Harris PA, 2009, J BIOMED INFORM, V42, P377, DOI 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
  13. Hickman LD, 2015, ARCH GERONTOL GERIAT, V61, P322, DOI 10.1016/j.archger.2015.06.021
  14. Hominick K, 2016, CAN GERIATR J, V19, P9, DOI 10.5770/cgj.19.195
  15. Inzitari M, 2015, J AM MED DIR ASSOC, V16, P837, DOI 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.04.009
  16. KATZ S, 1976, INT J HEALTH SERV, V6, P493, DOI 10.2190/UURL-2RYU-WRYD-EY3K
  17. McCabe JJ, 2015, OPEN ACCESS EMERG M, V7, P45, DOI 10.2147/OAEM.S69974
  18. McCusker J, 1999, J AM GERIATR SOC, V47, P1229, DOI 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb05204.x
  19. Periyakoil VJ, 2018, J AM GERIATR SOC, V66, P15, DOI 10.1111/jgs.15161
  20. Pilotto A, 2008, REJUV RES, V11, P151, DOI [10.1089/rej.2007.0569, 10.1089/rei.2007.0569]
  21. Pilotto A, 2017, J AM MED DIR ASSOC, V18, DOI 10.1016/j.jamda.2016.11.004
  22. Pilotto A, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0029090
  23. Royston P, 1999, INT J EPIDEMIOL, V28, P964, DOI 10.1093/ije/28.5.964
  24. Singler K, 2014, GERONTOLOGY, V60, P413, DOI 10.1159/000358825
  25. VANMARWIJK HWJ, 1995, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V45, P195
  26. Wou F, 2013, AGE AGEING, V42, P776, DOI 10.1093/ageing/aft055
  27. Yao JL, 2015, INT J CLIN EXP MED, V8, P4778
  28. YOUDEN WJ, 1950, CANCER, V3, P32, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>3.0.CO;2-3
  29. Yourman LC, 2012, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V307, P182, DOI 10.1001/jama.2011.1966

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCM
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/66