...
首页> 外文期刊>Anesthesiology >Accuracy and Feasibility of Clinically Applied Frailty Instruments before Surgery A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
【24h】

Accuracy and Feasibility of Clinically Applied Frailty Instruments before Surgery A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

机译:手术前临床应用临床施用仪器的准确性和可行性进行系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background: A barrier to routine preoperative frailty assessment is the large number of frailty instruments described. Previous systematic reviews estimate the association of frailty with outcomes, but none have evaluated outcomes at the individual instrument level or specific to clinical assessment of frailty, which must combine accuracy with feasibility to support clinical practice. Methods: The authors conducted a preregistered systematic review (CRD42019107551) of studies prospectively applying a frailty instrument in a clinical setting before surgery. Medline, Excerpta Medica Database, Cochrane Library and the Comprehensive Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane databases were searched using a peer-reviewed strategy. All stages of the review were completed in duplicate. The primary outcome was mortality and secondary outcomes reflected routinely collected and patient-centered measures; feasibility measures were also collected. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effects models or narratively synthesized. Risk of bias was assessed. Results: Seventy studies were included; 45 contributed to meta-analyses. Frailty was defined using 35 different instruments; five were meta-analyzed, with the Fried Phenotype having the largest number of studies. Most strongly associated with: mortality and nonfavorable discharge was the Clinical Frailty Scale (odds ratio, 4.89; 95% CI, 1.83 to 13.05 and odds ratio, 6.31; 95% CI, 4.00 to 9.94, respectively); complications was associated with the Edmonton Frail Scale (odds ratio, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.52 to 5.65); and delirium was associated with the Frailty Phenotype (odds ratio, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.75 to 8.22). The Clinical Frailty Scale had the highest reported measures of feasibility. Conclusions: Clinicians should consider accuracy and feasibility when choosing a frailty instrument. Strong evidence in both domains support the Clinical Frailty Scale, while the Fried Phenotype may require a trade-off of accuracy with lower feasibility.
机译:背景:常规术前脆弱评估的障碍是描述的大量易碎仪器。以前的系统评论估算了脆弱的结果与结果,但没有人在个人仪器级别评估结果或特定于脆弱的临床评估,这必须将准确性与可行性相结合,以支持临床实践。方法:作者对手术前临床环境中的研究进行了预期的系统评价(CRD42019107551),在临床环境中进行了前瞻性应用。使用同行评审策略,搜索了Medline,Excerpta Medica数据库,Cochrane图书馆和护理和盟友卫生文献的综合指数,以及Cochrane数据库。审查的所有阶段都已重复完成。主要结果是死亡率,二次结果反映了常规收集和以患者为中心的措施;还收集了可行性措施。使用随机效应模型或叙事合成汇集效果估计。评估偏见的风险。结果:包括七十研究; 45导致Meta-Analyses。使用35种不同的乐器定义了脆弱;五是荟萃分析的,具有最大数量的研究的油炸表型。最强烈的关联:死亡率和不可享用的排放是临床体积(差距,4.89; 95%CI,1.83至13.05和赔率比,6.31; 95%CI,4.00至9.94分别);并发症与Edmonton虚线(差距比例,2.93; 95%CI,1.52至5.65)有关;和谵妄与脆弱的表型(差距比,3.79; 95%CI,1.75至8.22)有关。临床脆弱的规模具有最高的可行性措施。结论:临床医生应在选择体力仪器时考虑准确性和可行性。两个域中的强有力证据支持临床脆性尺度,而油炸表型可能需要较低可行性的准确性的权衡。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Anesthesiology 》 |2020年第1期| 共18页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 麻醉学 ;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号