Cargando…

Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a frailty assessment tool used to identify frailty in older patients visiting the emergency department (ED). However, the current understanding of how it is used and accepted in ED clinical practice is limited. This study aimed to assess the feasibilit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hörlin, Erika, Munir Ehrlington, Samia, Toll John, Rani, Henricson, Joakim, Wilhelms, Daniel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10601295/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37880591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00894-8
_version_ 1785126170564493312
author Hörlin, Erika
Munir Ehrlington, Samia
Toll John, Rani
Henricson, Joakim
Wilhelms, Daniel
author_facet Hörlin, Erika
Munir Ehrlington, Samia
Toll John, Rani
Henricson, Joakim
Wilhelms, Daniel
author_sort Hörlin, Erika
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a frailty assessment tool used to identify frailty in older patients visiting the emergency department (ED). However, the current understanding of how it is used and accepted in ED clinical practice is limited. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of CFS in an ED setting. METHODS: This was a prospective, mixed methods study conducted in three Swedish EDs where CFS had recently been introduced. We examined the completion rate of CFS assessments in relation to patient- and organisational factors. A survey on staff experience of using CFS was also conducted. All quantitative data were analysed descriptively, while free text comments underwent a qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 4235 visits were analysed, and CFS assessments were performed in 47%. The completion rate exceeded 50% for patients over the age of 80. Patients with low triage priority were assessed to a low degree (24%). There was a diurnal variation with the highest completion rates seen for arrivals between 6 and 12 a.m. (58%). The survey response rate was 48%. The respondents rated the perceived relevance and the ease of use of the CFS with a median of 5 (IQR 2) on a scale with 7 being the highest. High workload, forgetfulness and critical illness were ranked as the top three barriers to assessment. The qualitative analysis showed that CFS assessments benefit from a clear routine and a sense of apparent relevance to emergency care. CONCLUSION: Most emergency staff perceived CFS as relevant and easy to use, yet far from all older ED patients were assessed. The most common barrier to assessment was high workload. Measures to facilitate use may include clarifying the purpose of the assessment with explicit follow-up actions, as well as formulating a clear routine for the assessment. REGISTRATION: The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 2021-06-18 (identifier: NCT04931472). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-023-00894-8.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10601295
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106012952023-10-27 Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study Hörlin, Erika Munir Ehrlington, Samia Toll John, Rani Henricson, Joakim Wilhelms, Daniel BMC Emerg Med Research BACKGROUND: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a frailty assessment tool used to identify frailty in older patients visiting the emergency department (ED). However, the current understanding of how it is used and accepted in ED clinical practice is limited. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of CFS in an ED setting. METHODS: This was a prospective, mixed methods study conducted in three Swedish EDs where CFS had recently been introduced. We examined the completion rate of CFS assessments in relation to patient- and organisational factors. A survey on staff experience of using CFS was also conducted. All quantitative data were analysed descriptively, while free text comments underwent a qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: A total of 4235 visits were analysed, and CFS assessments were performed in 47%. The completion rate exceeded 50% for patients over the age of 80. Patients with low triage priority were assessed to a low degree (24%). There was a diurnal variation with the highest completion rates seen for arrivals between 6 and 12 a.m. (58%). The survey response rate was 48%. The respondents rated the perceived relevance and the ease of use of the CFS with a median of 5 (IQR 2) on a scale with 7 being the highest. High workload, forgetfulness and critical illness were ranked as the top three barriers to assessment. The qualitative analysis showed that CFS assessments benefit from a clear routine and a sense of apparent relevance to emergency care. CONCLUSION: Most emergency staff perceived CFS as relevant and easy to use, yet far from all older ED patients were assessed. The most common barrier to assessment was high workload. Measures to facilitate use may include clarifying the purpose of the assessment with explicit follow-up actions, as well as formulating a clear routine for the assessment. REGISTRATION: The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov 2021-06-18 (identifier: NCT04931472). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12873-023-00894-8. BioMed Central 2023-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10601295/ /pubmed/37880591 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00894-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Hörlin, Erika
Munir Ehrlington, Samia
Toll John, Rani
Henricson, Joakim
Wilhelms, Daniel
Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
title Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
title_full Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
title_fullStr Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
title_full_unstemmed Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
title_short Is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? A mixed methods study
title_sort is the clinical frailty scale feasible to use in an emergency department setting? a mixed methods study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10601295/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37880591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12873-023-00894-8
work_keys_str_mv AT horlinerika istheclinicalfrailtyscalefeasibletouseinanemergencydepartmentsettingamixedmethodsstudy
AT munirehrlingtonsamia istheclinicalfrailtyscalefeasibletouseinanemergencydepartmentsettingamixedmethodsstudy
AT tolljohnrani istheclinicalfrailtyscalefeasibletouseinanemergencydepartmentsettingamixedmethodsstudy
AT henricsonjoakim istheclinicalfrailtyscalefeasibletouseinanemergencydepartmentsettingamixedmethodsstudy
AT wilhelmsdaniel istheclinicalfrailtyscalefeasibletouseinanemergencydepartmentsettingamixedmethodsstudy