Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39928399›Full record

ArticleJMIR perioperative medicine2025

Agreement Between Provider-Completed and Patient-Completed Preoperative Frailty Screening Using the Clinical Risk Analysis Index: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.

Mehraneh Khalighi, Amy C Thomas, Karl J Brown, Katherine C Ritchey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR perioperative medicine, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Mehraneh Khalighi *Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4604-1425
Amy C Thomas *Division of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5957-0425
Karl J Brown *Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8132-1196
Katherine C Ritchey *Division of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3490-3027

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFrailty is associated with postoperative morbidity and mortality. Preoperative screening and management of persons with frailty improves postoperative outcomes. The Clinical Risk Analysis Index (RAI-C) is a validated provider-based screening tool for assessing frailty in presurgical populations. Patient self-screening for frailty may provide an alternative to provider-based screening if resources are limited; however, the agreement between these 2 methods has not been previously explored.

objectiveThe objective of our study was to examine provider-completed versus patient-completed RAI-C assessments to identify areas of disagreement between the 2 methods and inform best practices for RAI-C screening implementation.

methodsOrthopedic physicians and physician assistants completed the RAI-C assessment on veterans aged 65 years and older undergoing elective total joint arthroplasty (eg, total hip or knee arthroplasty) and documented scores into the electronic health record during their preoperative clinic evaluation. Participants were then mailed the same RAI-C form after preoperative evaluation and returned responses to study coordinators. Agreement between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments and differences within individual domains were compared.

resultsA total of 49 participants aged 65 years and older presenting for total joint arthroplasty underwent RAI-C assessment between November 2022 and August 2023. In total, 41% (20/49) of participants completed and returned an independent postvisit RAI-C assessment before surgery and within 180 days of their initial evaluation. There was a moderate but statistically significant correlation between provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments (r=0.62; 95% CI 0.25-0.83; P=.003). Provider-completed and patient-completed RAI-C assessments resulted in the same frailty classification in 60% (12/20) of participants, but 40% (8/20) of participants were reclassified to a more frail category based on patient-completed assessment. Agreement was the lowest between provider-completed and patient-completed screening questions regarding memory and activities of daily living.

conclusionsRAI-C had moderate agreement when completed by providers versus the participants themselves, with more than a third of patient-completed screens resulting in a higher frailty classification. Future studies will need to explore the differences between and accuracy of RAI-C screening approaches to inform best practices for preoperative RAI-C assessment implementation.

Indexed as

FrailtyGeriatric AssessmentPreoperative CareAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleRisk AssessmentSurveys and Questionnairesarthroplastycross-sectionalelective surgeryfrailtyhipkneepreoperative screeningquality improvementquestionnaireRisk Analysis Indexself-reportedveteran

Identifiers

PMID39928399
PMCPMC11851030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.