Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39737615›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2025

Frailty screening in older patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery: Comparative study of seven screening instruments.

Katleen Fagard, Lisa Geyskens, Björk Van den Bogaert, Sarah Willems, Johan Flamaing, Albert Wolthuis, Mieke Deschodt

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Clinical Frailty Scale predicts overall survival after colon cancer surgery in people aged 80 years and older: A prospective multicentre observational study.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025
    Observational
  5. 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

7 authors.

Katleen FagardDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-5886-4432
Lisa GeyskensDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Björk Van den BogaertDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Sarah WillemsDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Johan FlamaingDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Albert WolthuisDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Mieke DeschodtDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1560-2277

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFrailty screening instruments are increasingly studied as risk predictors for adverse postoperative outcomes. However, because of the lack of comparative research, it is unclear which screening instrument performs best. This study therefore compared the diagnostic accuracy of seven frailty screening instruments for adverse postoperative outcomes in patients aged ≥70 years undergoing colorectal surgery.

methodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study at an academic hospital, examining the Fried and Robinson frailty criteria, the Edmonton Frail Scale, the Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale, the Modified Frailty Index, the FRAIL questionnaire, and the Geriatric 8 for predicting postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo (CD) severity grade ≥2. Secondary outcomes were complications with CD severity grade ≥3, prolonged length of stay, increased care level after discharge, and functional decline in basic or instrumental activities of daily living up to 1 month after surgery.

resultsThe study included 172 consecutive patients. Positive frailty screening ranged from 13.4% to 73.8%. CD≥2 complications were present in 37.8% of patients. At the original cutoffs, most instruments had a high specificity (76.7%-92.4%) at the expense of sensitivity (21.5%-38.5%) with a moderate negative predictive value (NPV) for predicting CD≥2 complications. The Geriatric 8 showed the opposite pattern (sensitivity 81.5%-specificity 30.8%) and a high NPV. Diagnostic accuracy was moderate for all screening instruments, since the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve did not exceed 0.61 across instruments. Altering the cutoff scores did not yield sufficient improvement. Comparable results were found for the secondary outcomes.

conclusionsComparing the predictive value of the screening instruments showed that frailty screening cannot be used in isolation as risk predictor for adverse postoperative outcomes. Further research should focus on a two-step approach in which additional diagnosis of frailty by means of comprehensive geriatric assessment is included in the prediction model.

Indexed as

Elective Surgical ProceduresFrail ElderlyFrailtyGeriatric AssessmentMass ScreeningPostoperative ComplicationsActivities of Daily LivingAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMalePredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificitySurveys and Questionnairescolorectal surgeryfrailty screeninggeriatricpostoperative complicationspostoperative outcomes

Identifiers

PMID39737615
PMCPMC11970229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.