• Jai N Darvall, Rinaldo Bellomo, Eldho Paul, Michael Bailey, Paul J Young, Alice Reid, Kenneth Rockwood, and David Pilcher.
• Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: jai.darvall@mh.org.au.
• Chest. 2021 Oct 1; 160 (4): 1292-1303.

BackgroundFrailty is associated with poor outcomes in critical illness. However, it is unclear whether frailty screening on admission to the ICU can be conducted routinely at the population level and whether it has prognostic importance.Research QuestionCan population-scale frailty screening with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) be implemented for critically ill adults in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) and can it identify patients at risk of negative outcomes?Study Design And MethodsWe conducted a binational prospective cohort study of critically ill adult patients admitted between July 1, 2018, and June 30, 2020, in 175 ICUs in ANZ. We classified frailty with the CFS on admission to the ICU. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), discharge destination, complications (delirium, pressure injury), and duration of survival.ResultsWe included 234,568 critically ill patients; 45,245 (19%) were diagnosed as living with frailty before ICU admission. Patients with vs without frailty had higher in-hospital mortality (16% vs 5%; P < .001), delirium (10% vs 4%; P < .001), longer LOS in the ICU and hospital, and increased new chronic care discharge (3% vs 1%; P < .001), with worse outcomes associated with increasing CFS category. Of patients with very severe frailty (CFS score, 8), 39% died in hospital vs 2% of very fit patients (CFS score, 1; multivariate categorical CFS score, 8 [reference, 1]; OR, 7.83 [95% CI, 6.39-9.59]; P < .001). After adjustment for illness severity, frailty remained highly significantly predictive of mortality, including among patients younger than 50 years, with improvement in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III-j score to 0.882 (95% CI, 0.879-0.885) from 0.868 (95% CI, 0.866-0.871) with the addition of frailty (P < .001).InterpretationLarge-scale population screening for frailty degree in critical illness was possible and prognostically important, with greater frailty (especially CFS score of ≥ 6) associated with worse outcomes, including among younger patients.Copyright © 2021 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

38 keywords...

hide…