Application of an Electronic Frailty Index to Identify High-Risk Older Adults Using Electronic Health Record Data.

Bharati Kochar, David Cheng, Hanna-Riikka Lehto, Nelia Jain, Elizabeth Araka, Christine S Ritchie, Rachelle Bernacki, Ariela R Orkaby
{"title":"Application of an Electronic Frailty Index to Identify High-Risk Older Adults Using Electronic Health Record Data.","authors":"Bharati Kochar, David Cheng, Hanna-Riikka Lehto, Nelia Jain, Elizabeth Araka, Christine S Ritchie, Rachelle Bernacki, Ariela R Orkaby","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Measurement of frailty is limited in clinical practice. Existing electronic frailty indices (eFIs) are derived from routine primary care encounters, with near-complete health condition capture. We aimed to develop an eFI from routinely collected clinical data and evaluate its performance in older adults without complete health condition capture.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using Electronic Health Record (EHR) data from an integrated regional health system, we created a cohort of patients who were ≥ 60 years on January 1, 2017 with two outpatient encounters in 3 years prior or one outpatient encounter in 2 years prior. We developed an eFI based on 31 age-related deficits identified using diagnostic and procedure codes. Frailty status was categorized as robust (eFI < 0.1), prefrail (0.1-0.2), frail (0.2-0.3), and very frail (> 0.3). We estimated cumulative incidence of mortality, acute care visits and readmissions by frailty, and fit Cox proportional hazards models. We repeated analyses in a sub-cohort of patients who receive primary care in the system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 518,449 patients, 43% were male with a mean age of 72 years; 73% were robust, 16% were pre-frail, 7% were frail, and 4% were very frail. Very frail older adults had a significantly higher risk for mortality (HR: 4.1, 95% CI: 4.0-4.3), acute care visits (HR: 5.5, 95% CI: 5.4-5.6), and 90-day readmissions (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 2.1-2.2) than robust older adults. In a primary care sub-cohort, while prevalence of deficits was higher, associations with outcomes were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This eFI identified older adults at increased risk for adverse health outcomes even when data from routine primary care visits were not available. This tool can be integrated into EHRs for frailty assessment at scale.</p>","PeriodicalId":94112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19389","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Measurement of frailty is limited in clinical practice. Existing electronic frailty indices (eFIs) are derived from routine primary care encounters, with near-complete health condition capture. We aimed to develop an eFI from routinely collected clinical data and evaluate its performance in older adults without complete health condition capture.

Methods: Using Electronic Health Record (EHR) data from an integrated regional health system, we created a cohort of patients who were ≥ 60 years on January 1, 2017 with two outpatient encounters in 3 years prior or one outpatient encounter in 2 years prior. We developed an eFI based on 31 age-related deficits identified using diagnostic and procedure codes. Frailty status was categorized as robust (eFI < 0.1), prefrail (0.1-0.2), frail (0.2-0.3), and very frail (> 0.3). We estimated cumulative incidence of mortality, acute care visits and readmissions by frailty, and fit Cox proportional hazards models. We repeated analyses in a sub-cohort of patients who receive primary care in the system.

Results: Among 518,449 patients, 43% were male with a mean age of 72 years; 73% were robust, 16% were pre-frail, 7% were frail, and 4% were very frail. Very frail older adults had a significantly higher risk for mortality (HR: 4.1, 95% CI: 4.0-4.3), acute care visits (HR: 5.5, 95% CI: 5.4-5.6), and 90-day readmissions (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 2.1-2.2) than robust older adults. In a primary care sub-cohort, while prevalence of deficits was higher, associations with outcomes were similar.

Conclusions: This eFI identified older adults at increased risk for adverse health outcomes even when data from routine primary care visits were not available. This tool can be integrated into EHRs for frailty assessment at scale.

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
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
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Application of an Electronic Frailty Index to Identify High-Risk Older Adults Using Electronic Health Record Data. Cancer and Accelerated Aging Research at the National Institutes of Health, 2013-2023: A Grant Portfolio Analysis. Home-Based Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Community-Dwelling, At-Risk, Frail Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Individualized Net Benefit of Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in SPRINT. Inspiring Undergraduate Student Training in Alzheimer's Research (USTAR): Training the Next Generation of Aging Scientists.
×
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