2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2020.06.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of two frailty identification tools for critically ill patients: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
14
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We determined frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) [ 17 , 18 ] at the time of ICU admission, based on the patient's level of physical function in the month preceding admission [ 19 ]. The highest level of mobility during ICU stay was determined using the ICU mobility scale [ 20 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We determined frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) [ 17 , 18 ] at the time of ICU admission, based on the patient's level of physical function in the month preceding admission [ 19 ]. The highest level of mobility during ICU stay was determined using the ICU mobility scale [ 20 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…18 Department of Physiotherapy, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 19 Physiotherapy Department, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 20 Canberra Health Services, Canberra, Australia.…”
Section: Supplementary Informationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is good evidence that frailty measures rely heavily on pre-existing comorbidities for frailty classification, for instance, modified frailty index. 52 However, this systematic review demonstrated that phenotype frailty measurements were utilised more in the surgical patients admitted to ICU.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Another popular score is based on the frailty index originally suggested by Rockwood that has been condensed from the original 70 clinical deficit assessments to more simple versions using only 19 15 or 11 and lately only five items, 16 all titled modified frailty index (mFI). By reducing the original list in this way, mainly using diagnostic codes, there is a risk that information about frailty components gets lost.…”
Section: Frailty—methods To Identify Frail Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%