Finding consensus on Frailty Assessment in Acute Care through Delphi method
File(s)Delphi.pdf (1.4 MB) BMJ Open-2016-Soong-.pdf (1.53 MB)
Accepted version
Published version
Author(s)
Soong, JTY
Poots, AJ
BELL, D
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Objective: We seek to address gaps in knowledge and agreement around optimal frailty assessment in the acute medical care setting. Frailty is a common term describing older persons who are at increased risk of developing multi-morbidity, disability, institutionalisation, and death. Consensus has not been reached on the practical implementation of this concept to assess clinically and manage older persons in the acute care setting.
Design: Modified Delphi, via electronic questionnaire. Questions included ranking items that best
recognise frailty, optimal timing, location, and contextual elements of a successful tool. Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients for overall levels of agreement; with consensus and stability tested by two-way ANOVA with absolute agreement and Fisher's Exact Test.
Participants: A panel of national experts (academics, front-line clinicians, and specialist charities) were invited to electronic correspondence.
Results: Variables reflecting accumulated deficit and high resource utilisation were perceived by participants as the most useful indicators of frailty in the acute care setting. The Acute Medical Unit
and Care of the older Persons Ward were perceived as optimum settings for frailty assessment. "Clinically meaningful and relevant", "simple (easy to use)" and "Accessible by multidisciplinary team" were perceived as characteristics of a successful frailty assessment tool in the acute care
setting. No agreement was reached on optimal timing, number of variables, and organisational structures.
Conclusions: This study is a first step in developing consensus for a clinically relevant frailty assessment model for the acute care setting, providing content validation, and illuminating contextual requirements. Testing on clinical datasets is a research priority.
Design: Modified Delphi, via electronic questionnaire. Questions included ranking items that best
recognise frailty, optimal timing, location, and contextual elements of a successful tool. Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients for overall levels of agreement; with consensus and stability tested by two-way ANOVA with absolute agreement and Fisher's Exact Test.
Participants: A panel of national experts (academics, front-line clinicians, and specialist charities) were invited to electronic correspondence.
Results: Variables reflecting accumulated deficit and high resource utilisation were perceived by participants as the most useful indicators of frailty in the acute care setting. The Acute Medical Unit
and Care of the older Persons Ward were perceived as optimum settings for frailty assessment. "Clinically meaningful and relevant", "simple (easy to use)" and "Accessible by multidisciplinary team" were perceived as characteristics of a successful frailty assessment tool in the acute care
setting. No agreement was reached on optimal timing, number of variables, and organisational structures.
Conclusions: This study is a first step in developing consensus for a clinically relevant frailty assessment model for the acute care setting, providing content validation, and illuminating contextual requirements. Testing on clinical datasets is a research priority.
Date Issued
2016-10-14
Date Acceptance
2016-09-06
Citation
BMJ Open, 2016, 6
ISSN
2044-6055
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Journal / Book Title
BMJ Open
Volume
6
Copyright Statement
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which
permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for
commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which
permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for
commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License URL
Sponsor
Royal College of Physicians
National Institute for Health Research
Grant Number
N/A
N/A
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
e012904