Clinician Estimates of Frailty Compared to Formal Frailty Assessment in Adults With Heart Failure: A Cross-Sectional Analysis
Publication Name
Heart Lung and Circulation
Abstract
Background: Frailty assessment is recommended for patients with heart failure. Despite the availability of instruments to assess frailty, there are no clear recommendations regarding the optimal instrument to use in a heart failure context. This ambiguity combined with a lack of education and resources, often leads clinicians to rely on subjective estimates of frailty, such as ‘the end-of-the-bed’ or ‘eyeball’ test. Aim: To examine the association between clinician-estimated frailty and formal frailty assessment in adults with heart failure. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of the FRAilty MEasurement in Heart Failure (FRAME-HF) study. Participants: (1) Adults aged ≥18 years in the outpatient heart failure clinic and cardiology ward; (2) and cardiovascular clinicians (nurses, physicians, and allied-health professionals). Following participant recruitment, cardiovascular clinicians were asked to rate the participant's frailty status based on their routine clinical assessment as either: frail, pre-frail, or non-frail, which was then compared to a formal frailty assessment using a modified version of the Frailty Phenotype. The association between clinician-estimated frailty and formal frailty assessment were examined using a weighted Kappa statistic and Spearman's correlation coefficient. Results: A total of 75 patients and 39 clinicians were recruited, producing 194 paired frailty assessments. Mean age of the patients was 54 (±13) years. Correlation of pooled clinician-estimated frailty to formal frailty was fair (0.52, p=0.00). Correlation was highest between allied-health estimated frailty and formal frailty (0.70, p=0.00). Agreement between pooled clinician-estimated frailty and formal frailty was fair (0.33) and was highest between allied health-estimated frailty and formal frailty (0.45). Conclusion: Subjective clinician-estimated frailty is not a reliable replacement for formal frailty assessment in adults with heart failure, underscoring the need for assessment using a valid and reliable instrument.
Open Access Status
This publication is not available as open access
Funding Number
APP1196262
Funding Sponsor
National Health and Medical Research Council