ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care
Home visits: A new screening tool for frailty? A retrospective exploratory study.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- How frail are our elderly? An assessment with Tilburg frailty indicator (TFI) in a rural elderly population of West Bengal.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the United Kingdom, the new NHS contract for primary care mandates that practices use the Electronic Frailty Index (EFI) to screen for frailty and apply clinical judgment, based on knowledge of the patient, to decide whether they have a diagnosis of frailty. EFI has not yet been validated for this purpose. Many primary care clinicians would agree that although not formally investigated, there seems to be a strong association between being housebound or in institutional care and having a diagnosis of frailty. Although being housebound or in institutional care is not commonly coded in primary care computer record systems (IT), this cohort of patients do require home visits if they become unwell. Home visits are coded and it is simple to run a search on primary care IT to generate a list of older people who have received a home over given period.
aimThis study assessed whether being housebound and requiring home visits could form a new screening tool for frailty. DESIGN AND
settingRetrospective cohort study from 1/3/15 to 29/2/16. Primary care, South Devon.
methodMedical records of 154 patients over 65 years of age were evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups: a group (
resultsHome visits have a sensitivity of 87.23% [95% confidence interval (CI): 74.35%-95.17%] and specificity of 61.68% (95% CI: 51.78%-70.92%). For frailty, Cohen's Kappa showed fair interobserver reliability.
conclusionThis study suggests that home visits are a good screen for frailty; the data are easy to retrieve from primary care IT and could be used as a valid screening tool to assist with identifying frailty in primary care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.