Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39253302›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open2024

Addition of the clinical frailty scale to triage tools and early warning scores improves mortality prognostication at 30 days: A prospective observational multicenter study.

Jens Wretborn, Samia Munir-Ehrlington, Erika Hörlin, Daniel B Wilhelms

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06869148 (Evaluation of Prioritized Assessment for Older Patients Living With Frailty Presenting to the Emergency Department), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06869148 completednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Prioritized Assessment for Older Patients Living With Frailty Presenting to the Emergency Department

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, LinkoepingRan2025 to 2025Enrolled1,217ConditionsFrailty, Length of Stay, Emergency Department Visit, Older PatientsArmsPrioritized assessment for older patients living with frailty
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jens WretbornDepartment of Emergency Medicine and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Linköping University Linköping Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0549-6805
Samia Munir-EhrlingtonDepartment of Emergency Medicine and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Linköping University Linköping Sweden.
Erika HörlinDepartment of Emergency Medicine and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Linköping University Linköping Sweden.
Daniel B WilhelmsDepartment of Emergency Medicine and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Linköping University Linköping Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Frailty, assessed with clinical frailty scale (CFS), alone or in combination with aggregated vital signs, has been proposed as a measure to better predict mortality of older patients in the emergency department (ED), but the added predictive value to conventional triage is unclear. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study in three EDs in Sweden that evaluated the prognostic performance of the CFS alone or in combination with the national early warning score (NEWS), triage early warning score (TEWS) or the rapid emergency triage and treatment system (RETTS) triage tool using logistic regression. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality with 7- and 90-day mortality and admission as secondary outcomes reported as area under the receiver operating curve (AuROC) scores with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, predictive values, and likelihood ratios are reported for all models. Results: A total of 1832 patients were included with 17 (0.9%), 57 (3.1%), and 121 (6.6%) patients dying within 7, 30, and 90 days, respectively. The admission rate was 43% (795/1832). Frailty (CFS > 4) was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (odds ratio 6, 95% CI 3‒12, Conclusion: Frailty measured with the CFS in combination with RETTS or structured vital sign assessment using NEWS or TEWS was better at prognosticating 30-day mortality compared to RETTS or early warnings score alone. Improved prognostication provides more realistic expectations and allows for informed discussions with patients and initiation of individualized treatment plans early in the ED process.

Identifiers

PMID39253302
PMCPMC11381915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.