Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39806651›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Prognostic signature of multimorbidity, geriatric syndromes and resources cluster in older in- and outpatients: a pooled secondary analysis with a 6-month follow-up.

Jill Stegemann, Anna Maria Affeldt, Luisa Mück, Anne Ferring, Laura Gerhards, Lena Pickert, Annika Bausch, Thomas Benzing, Philipp Antczak, M Cristina Polidori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Jill Stegemann *Department II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-7845-276X
Anna Maria Affeldt *Department II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Luisa MückDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Anne FerringDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Laura GerhardsDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Lena PickertDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Annika BauschDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Thomas BenzingDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Philipp AntczakDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
M Cristina PolidoriDepartment II of Internal Medicine and Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany maria.polidori-nelles@uk-koeln.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8881-904X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe prognosis of older adults is strongly influenced by the relation of multifactorial geriatric syndromes (GS) and their health-maintaining counterparts, geriatric resources (GR). The present analysis aimed to identify clusters of comorbidities, GS and GR, and to measure their multidimensional prognostic signature in older patients admitted to different healthcare settings.

designPooled secondary analysis of three longitudinal interventional studies with the 3- and 6-month follow-up data collection on mortality and rehospitalisation.

settingInpatients in an internal medicine ward (n=495), inpatients in an ageing medicine ward (n=123) and outpatients from a general practice (n=105).

participantsA total of 734 patients with multimorbidity who aged over 60 years were recruited between August 2016 and July 2020 (mean age 77.8 years, SD 6.2 and 43% female). OUTCOME MEASURES: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), including Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), 17 GS and 10 GR, and the CGA-based Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) as a measure of multidimensional prognosis and frailty were assessed. Based on a general linear model and a hierarchical clustering method, clusters of comorbidities, GS and GR were obtained.

resultsThe study identified five clusters of GR-related GS, namely, psychosocial, iatrogenic, neurovegetative, sensorimotor and fluid dysbalance, along with two clusters related to GR, focusing on independence achievement and requirements- circumstances. Additionally, two clusters were identified pertaining to the CIRS, encompassing sensory-vegetative and heart-kidney morbidity. Patients within the iatrogenic cluster exhibited significantly higher MPI and readmissions during follow-up compared with those outside this cluster (p<0.001). Furthermore, membership in the fluid dysbalance or psychosocial cluster was associated with a significantly increased mortality rate during follow-up (p<0.001).

conclusionsA feasible combination of GR and GS in clinical routine enables the identification of clusters with clear prognostic relevance, which may improve prognosis through tailored treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: DRKS00010606/DRKS00013791/DRKS00017094

Indexed as

Geriatric AssessmentMultimorbidityOutpatientsAgedAged, 80 and overCluster AnalysisFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFrailtyHumansInpatientsLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPatient ReadmissionPrognosisAgedAgeingGERIATRIC MEDICINEINTERNAL MEDICINEPatient-centered

Identifiers

PMID39806651
PMCPMC11667294

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.