Interest of the multidimensional prognostic index (MPI) as an assessment tool in hospitalized patients in geriatrics

Brunet, Thomas; Bureau, Marie-Laure; Caupenne, A.; Liuu, Évelyne; Saulnier, Pierre‐Jean; Gand, Elise; Pocard, Marc

doi:10.1684/pnv.2019.0823

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The main outcomes in this study are the scores of the following frailty indices referenced in the literature: Fried Frailty Phenotype Criteria [ 19 ] ; Frailty Trait Scale–short version [ 20 ] ; SHARE Frailty Instrument [ 21 ] ; the FRAIL scale [ 22 ] ; the Gérontopôle Frailty Screening Tool [ 31 ] ; the Clinical Frailty Scale [ 25 ] ; the Rockwood and Mitnitsky Frailty Index [ 22 ] ; the Edmonton Frailty Scale [ 23 ] ; the Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of weight Index [ 24 ] ; the Multidimensional Prognostic Index [ 26 ] ; the Tilburg Frailty Indicator [ 27 ] ; PRISMA-7 [ 28 ] ; the Groningen Frailty Indicator [ 29 ] ; the Sherbrooke Postal Questionnaire [ 30 ] ; and the Kihon Checklist. [ 32 ]…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Exercise interventions for older people at risk for frailty

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2021

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Frailty is a state of age-related reduced physiological reserve characterized by an increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes. Studies have shown that exercise can improve frailty in older people. However, it remains to be seen which exercises will most improve the fitness of older people with frailty or those at the risk for frailty. Objective: This protocol aims to determine whether physical exercise can improve frailty in older people, and if which methods are most effective. Methods: We searched the following databases for relevant articles published between January 1, 2012 and January 1, 2021: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Wanfang, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Clinical Trials Database, and the Science Network. Two independent reviewers will carry out data extraction, discuss and resolve differences, and obtain consensus from the third author. We will select randomized control trials (RCTs) according to the preformulated inclusion criteria. The main outcomes in this study are scores from Fried Frailty Phenotype Criteria; the Frailty Trait Scale–short form; the SHARE Frailty Instrument; the FRAIL scale; the Gérontopôle Frailty Screening Tool; the Clinical Frailty Scale, the Rockwood and Mitnitsky Frailty Index; the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Index; the Edmonton Frailty Scale; the Fatigue, Resistance, Ambulation, Illness and Loss of Weight Index; the Multidimensional Prognostic Index; the Tilburg Frailty Indicator; PRISMA-7; the Groningen Frailty Indicator; the Sherbrooke Postal Questionnaire; and the Kihon Checklist. Secondary outcomes are muscle strength, gait velocity, stair-climbing power, and level of spontaneous physical activity. If the heterogeneity test shows slight or no statistical heterogeneity, a fixed effects model will be used for data synthesis; otherwise, a random effects model will be used. We will develop a unified data extraction table that includes a number of parameters. The Cochrane Cooperative Bias Risk Tool will be used to evaluate the methodological quality of the selected RCTs. RevMan Manager 5.3 and STATA 14.0 will be used for data analysis if enough RCTs (more than 10) are identified and selected. Result: The final results will provide information on the effectiveness of intervention programs for frail older adul and further demonstrate which exercise programs are more effective and which methods can significantly improve frailty. Conclusion: This protocol will contribute to the development of more effective interventions for elderly individuals with frailty. Ethics and dissemination: This study applies existing literature references; therefore, ethical approval is not required. INPLASY registration number: INPLASY202130107

show abstract

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Exercise interventions for older people at risk for frailty

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2021

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A multidimensional approach, named Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI), has recently been developed and validated for prognostic use in a general, clinical geriatric setting [3-5]. The systematic use of this tool generates a score from 0 to 1 that identifies three levels of mortality risk, a higher MPI being associated with a higher one-year mortality risk, rehospitalisation, healthcare utilisation, incidence of geriatric syndromes, and length of stay [6, 7]. MPI can be used as a prognostic indicator for older hospitalised patients, as confirmed in different acute or chronic disease settings [3, 8, 9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidimensional Prognostic Index Predicts Clinical Outcome and Mortality in Hospitalised Older Patients with Diverticular Disease

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) is a validated tool for assessing mortality risk in hospitalised patients. We aimed to evaluate whether the MPI predicted mortality and the risk of developing diverticular disease (DD) complications in older patients. Methods: This is a multicentre study conducted in January 2016-March 2018. All patients with DD aged 65 years and older were included. Patients were stratified into three groups according to MPI groups (1, low risk; 2, moderate risk; 3, high risk). Risk of developing DD complications and mortality rate were assessed. Bivariate models were fitted. Results: One hundred hospitalised patients with DD (mean age 77.9 ± 10.6 years, 53 female patients) were included. Patients with higher MPI groups were more likely to develop DD complications. In particular, 12 (46.2%), 21 (52.5%), and 28 (82.4%) patients with complicated DD were distributed to the MPI 1, MPI 2, and MPI 3 groups (p = 0.0063), respectively. Two patients died in the MPI 1, 4 in the MPI 2, and 29 in the MPI 3 group, with mortality rates of 4.0 per 100 person-year (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0–15.9), 5.6 (95% CI 2.1–15.0), and 89.2 (95% CI 62–130), respectively (log-rank test p < 0.001). In bivariate analysis, after adjustment for age >80 years, Charlson Comorbidity Index >4, DD complications, and the presence of thromboembolism, higher MPI group was independently associated with higher mortality. Those in the MPI 3 group experienced a greater risk of 1-year hospital readmission (p < 0.001). Conclusion: MPI predicted mortality in patients with DD and also correlated with the risk of developing DD complications. Studies focussing on possible pathophysiological mechanisms between DD complications and MPI are needed.

show abstract

Complex geriatric assessment in elderly with cancer

Kubešová¹

2020

Onkologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interest of the multidimensional prognostic index (MPI) as an assessment tool in hospitalized patients in geriatrics

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Exercise interventions for older people at risk for frailty

Exercise interventions for older people at risk for frailty

Multidimensional Prognostic Index Predicts Clinical Outcome and Mortality in Hospitalised Older Patients with Diverticular Disease

Complex geriatric assessment in elderly with cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About