ArticleArthroplasty (London, England)2026
Risk analysis index demonstrates superior predictive performance compared to traditional frailty metrics in elderly female patients undergoing inpatient total shoulder arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile frailty assessment has become integral to preoperative risk stratification, the optimal measurement tool remains unclear for elderly women undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). This study compared the predictive performance of the Risk Analysis Index (RAI) against traditional metrics, including the modified frailty index-5 (mFI-5) and Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) in this specific population.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of ACS NSQIP data from 2015-2021, including female patients aged 65-89 undergoing inpatient TSA. RAI incorporates age, functional status, recent weight loss, and physiological markers, including renal failure, congestive heart failure, and dyspnea. The mFI-5 assesses five comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, COPD, heart failure, functional dependence), while the GNRI evaluates nutritional status using albumin and body weight. The discriminative ability of RAI, mFI-5, and GNRI was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) analysis for multiple 30-day outcomes. Primary outcomes were non-home discharge and extended length of stay (≥ 4 days), selected based on their clinical importance for discharge planning and quality metrics. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, major and minor complications, readmission, and reoperation. Discriminative ability was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Internal validation was performed using bootstrap resampling.
resultsAmong 11,965 patients analyzed, RAI demonstrated superior predictive performance for primary outcomes with AUCs of 0.784 for non-home discharge and 0.670 for extended length of stay, significantly outperforming mFI-5 (AUCs 0.601 and 0.590, respectively) and GNRI (AUCs 0.544 and 0.543). For secondary outcomes, RAI maintained competitive performance across mortality, complications, readmissions, and reoperations.
conclusionThe Risk Analysis Index provides superior discrimination for non-home discharge and extended length of stay compared to traditional frailty measures in elderly female TSA patients, with particularly strong predictive performance for discharge disposition, supporting its adoption as the preferred risk stratification tool for discharge planning in this population. Video Abstract.
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.