Multidimensional frailty in elderly emergency department patients: unveiling the prevalence and significance of social frailty.

IF 2.4 CJEM Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1007/s43678-024-00717-0
Yu-Chieh Tsai, Edward Pei-Chuan Huang, Chien-Hua Huang, Ya-Mei Chen
{"title":"Multidimensional frailty in elderly emergency department patients: unveiling the prevalence and significance of social frailty.","authors":"Yu-Chieh Tsai, Edward Pei-Chuan Huang, Chien-Hua Huang, Ya-Mei Chen","doi":"10.1007/s43678-024-00717-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to assess the prevalence and factors of physical, psychological, and social frailty among older adults in the emergency department, comparing these data with community population to understand emergency setting manifestations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Conducted at the Emergency Department of National Taiwan University BioMedical Park Hospital, this prospective observational cohort study enrolled older adult patients over a three-month period. Frailty assessments included the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures scale for physical frailty, the Tilburg Frailty Indicator for psychological frailty, and the Makizako Social Frailty Index for social frailty. Data analysis involved a multivariable logistic model to determine the risk factors associated with each frailty type.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 991 older adult individuals seeking medical care, 207 participated in the study. The study found high prevalence rates of frailty: 46.38% for physical, 41.06% for psychological, and 48.79% for social frailty. Risk factors for frailty included older age and a history of falls. Interestingly, the prevalence of social frailty was notably higher than physical and psychological frailty. Gender and polypharmacy showed no significant association with any frailty type.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This research reveals high physical, psychological, and social frailty among older ED patients, especially noting social frailty's prevalence. It highlights the importance for emergency care to adopt holistic care strategies that address older adults' multifaceted health challenges, suggesting a paradigm shift in current healthcare practices to better cater to the multifaceted needs of this vulnerable population.</p>","PeriodicalId":93937,"journal":{"name":"CJEM","volume":" ","pages":"549-553"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CJEM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-024-00717-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the prevalence and factors of physical, psychological, and social frailty among older adults in the emergency department, comparing these data with community population to understand emergency setting manifestations.

Methods: Conducted at the Emergency Department of National Taiwan University BioMedical Park Hospital, this prospective observational cohort study enrolled older adult patients over a three-month period. Frailty assessments included the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures scale for physical frailty, the Tilburg Frailty Indicator for psychological frailty, and the Makizako Social Frailty Index for social frailty. Data analysis involved a multivariable logistic model to determine the risk factors associated with each frailty type.

Results: Out of 991 older adult individuals seeking medical care, 207 participated in the study. The study found high prevalence rates of frailty: 46.38% for physical, 41.06% for psychological, and 48.79% for social frailty. Risk factors for frailty included older age and a history of falls. Interestingly, the prevalence of social frailty was notably higher than physical and psychological frailty. Gender and polypharmacy showed no significant association with any frailty type.

Conclusion: This research reveals high physical, psychological, and social frailty among older ED patients, especially noting social frailty's prevalence. It highlights the importance for emergency care to adopt holistic care strategies that address older adults' multifaceted health challenges, suggesting a paradigm shift in current healthcare practices to better cater to the multifaceted needs of this vulnerable population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
急诊科老年患者的多维虚弱:揭示社会虚弱的普遍性和重要性。
目的:本研究旨在评估急诊科中老年人身体、心理和社会脆弱性的发生率和因素,并将这些数据与社区人群进行比较,以了解急诊环境中的表现:这项前瞻性观察性队列研究在台湾大学生物医学园区医院急诊科进行,共招募了三个月的老年患者。虚弱评估包括针对身体虚弱的骨质疏松性骨折研究量表、针对心理虚弱的蒂尔堡虚弱指标以及针对社会虚弱的牧座子社会虚弱指数。数据分析采用多变量逻辑模型,以确定与每种虚弱类型相关的风险因素:在 991 名就医的老年人中,有 207 人参与了研究。研究发现,身体虚弱的发生率很高:身体虚弱占 46.38%,心理脆弱占 41.06%,社交脆弱占 48.79%。体弱的风险因素包括年龄偏大和跌倒史。有趣的是,社交脆弱的发生率明显高于身体和心理脆弱。性别和多重药物治疗与任何一种虚弱类型都没有明显关联:这项研究揭示了急诊室老年患者在身体、心理和社交方面的脆弱性,尤其是社交脆弱性的普遍性。它强调了急诊护理采取整体护理策略以应对老年人多方面健康挑战的重要性,并建议转变当前的医疗保健实践模式,以更好地满足这一弱势群体的多方面需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Machine learning outperforms the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) in predicting need for early critical care. The role of partial resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in pre-hospital trauma. Just the facts: evaluation and management of epistaxis. Safety and accuracy of the computer interpretation of normal ECGs at triage. Correction: Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of rapid HIV testing in Canadian Emergency Departments: a mixed methods study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1