An overview of the resilience world: Proceedings of the American Geriatrics Society and National Institute on Aging State of Resilience Science Conference.

Resilience, which relates to one's ability to respond to stressors, typically declines with age and the development of comorbid conditions in older organisms. Although progress has been made to improve our understanding of resilience in older adults, disciplines have employed different frameworks and definitions to study various aspects of older adults' response to acute or chronic stressors. "Overview of the Resilience World: State of the Science," a bench-to-bedside conference on October 12-13, 2022, was sponsored by the American Geriatrics Society and National Institute on Aging. This conference, summarized in this report, explored commonalities and differences among the frameworks of resilience most commonly used in aging research in the three domains of resilience: physical, cognitive, and psychosocial. These three main domains are intertwined, and stressors in one domain can lead to effects in other domains. The themes of the conference sessions included underlying contributors to resilience, the dynamic nature of resilience throughout the life span, and the role of resilience in health equity. Although participants did not agree on a single definition of "resilience(s)," they identified common core elements of a definition that can be applied to all domains and noted unique features that are domain specific. The presentations and discussions led to recommendations for new longitudinal studies of the impact of exposures to stressors on resilience in older adults, the use of new and existing cohort study data, natural experiments (including the COVID-19 pandemic), and preclinical models for resilience research, as well as translational research to bring findings on resilience to patient care.

The effects of computerised cognitive training on post-CABG delirium and cognitive change: A prospective randomised controlled trial.

Background: Cognitive impairments, including delirium, are common after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Improving cognition pre- and post-operatively using computerised cognitive training (CCT) may be an effective approach to improve cognitive outcomes in CABG patients. Objectives: Investigate the effect of remotely supervised CCT on cognitive outcomes, including delirium, in older adults undergoing CABG surgery. Methods: Thirty-six participants, were analysed in a single-blinded randomised controlled trial (CCT Intervention: n = 18, Control: n = 18). CCT was completed by the intervention group pre-operatively (every other day, 45-60-minute sessions until surgery) and post-operatively, beginning 1-month post-CABG (3 x 45-60-minute sessions/week for 12-weeks), while the control group maintained usual care plus weekly phone calls. Cognitive assessments were conducted pre- and post-operatively at multiple follow-ups (discharge, 4-months and 6-months). Post-operative delirium incidence was assessed daily until discharge. Cognitive change data were calculated at each follow-up for each cognitive test (Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III and CANTAB; z-scored). Results: Adherence to the CCT intervention (completion of three pre-operative or 66% of post-operative sessions) was achieved in 68% of pre-CABG and 59% of post-CABG participants. There were no statistically significant effects of CCT on any cognitive outcome, including delirium incidence. Conclusion: Adherence to the CCT program was comparatively higher than previous feasibility studies, possibly due to the level of supervision and support provided (blend of face-to-face and home-based training, with support phone calls). Implementing CCT interventions both pre- and post-operatively is feasible in those undergoing CABG. No statistically significant benefits from the CCT interventions were identified for delirium or cognitive function post-CABG, likely due to the sample size available (study recruitment greatly impacted by COVID-19). It also may be the case that multimodal intervention would be more effective.

The Impact of Elective Surgical Restriction during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery: patient perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: In late 2019 and early 2020 a novel coronavirus (Covid-19) spread across the world creating a global pandemic. In the state of Pennsylvania, non-emergent, elective operations were temporarily delayed from proceeding with normal standard of care. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients who required prescription pain medication during the surgical delay. Secondarily, we sought to determine the proportion of patients who perceived their surgery as non-elective and evaluate how symptoms were managed during the delay. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single institutional database was used to retrospectively identify all shoulder and elbow surgeries scheduled between March 13, 2020 and May 6, 2020. Charts were manually reviewed. Patients who underwent non-shoulder and elbow related procedures and patients of surgeons outside of Pennsylvania were excluded. Patients whose surgeries were "postponed" or "canceled" were administered a survey evaluating how symptoms were managed and perceptions regarding the delay. Preoperative functional scores were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to determine associations between procedure status, preoperative functional scores, perception of surgery, and requirement for prescription pain medication. RESULTS: 338 patients were scheduled for shoulder/elbow surgery at our practice in Pennsylvania. 89 patients (26.3%) underwent surgery as initially scheduled. 179 patients (71.9%) had their surgeries postponed. 70 patients (28.1%) canceled surgery. The average delay in surgery was 86.7 days (range, 13-299 days). 176 (70.7%) patients who were postponed or canceled responded to the survey. 39 patients (22.2%) required prescription pain medication during the delay. 73 patients (41%) considered their procedure to be elective in nature. 137 patients (78%) would have moved forward with surgery if done safely under appropriate medical guidelines. Lower preoperative ASES and SANE scores (r= -0.36, p<0.001; r=-0.26, p=0.016, respectively), and higher preoperative VAS scores were correlated with requiring prescription pain medication (r=0.28, p=0.009). Higher preoperative ASES score was positively correlated with perception of surgery as elective (r=0.4; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing elective shoulder and elbow surgery during the Covid-19 pandemic experienced a delay of nearly 3 months on average. Fewer than half of patients perceived their surgeries as elective procedures. Nearly a quarter of patients surveyed required extra prescription pain medicine during their delay. This study elucidates the fact that while orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgery is generally considered "elective" it is more important to a majority of patients. These findings may also be applicable to future potential mandated surgical care delays by other third- party organizations.

What is the relationship between validated frailty scores and mortality for adults with COVID-19 in acute hospital care? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the association between frailty and COVID-19 in relation to mortality in hospitalised patients. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the grey literature were searched for papers from inception to 10 September 2020; the search was re-run in Medline up until the 9 December 2020. Screening, data extraction and quality grading were undertaken by two reviewers. Results were summarised using descriptive statistics, including a meta-analysis of overall mortality; the relationships between frailty and COVID-19 mortality were summarised narratively. RESULTS: A total of 2,286 papers were screened resulting in 26 being included in the review. Most studies were from Europe, half from the UK, and one from Brazil; the median sample size was 242.5, median age 73.1 and 43.5% were female. In total, 22/26 used the Clinical Frailty Scale; reported mortality ranged from 14 to 65%. Most, but not all studies showed an association between increasing frailty and a greater risk of dying. Two studies indicated a sub-additive relationship between frailty, COVID-19 and death, and two studies showed no association. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the majority of studies have shown a positive association between COVID-19-related death and increasing frailty, some studies suggested a more nuanced understanding of frailty and outcomes in COVID-19 is needed. Clinicians should exert caution in placing too much emphasis on the influence of frailty alone when discussing likely prognosis in older people with COVID-19 illness.

Play attention! Therapeutic aspects to play in delirium prevention and management.

It is recognised that delirium is common among older adult inpatients and correlated with negative outcomes. The gold standard care for delirium management is achieved using multicomponent interventions. Which components work best is not yet well defined. During the COVID-19 outbreak, a paediatric ward was repurposed to treat adult patients. Paediatric nurses and play specialists remained on the ward. It was observed that the paediatric ward aesthetic and the team's dedicated approach to cognitive stimulation and sleep promotion improved well-being among older adult patients. We propose that elements of paediatric care, primarily deployment of a play specialist, could be incorporated into a multicomponent intervention for delirium prevention and management.

Presenting features of COVID-19 in older people: relationships with frailty, inflammation and mortality.

PURPOSE: To describe the clinical features of COVID-19 in older adults, and relate these to outcomes. METHODS: A cohort study of 217 individuals (median age 80, IQR 74-85 years; 62% men) hospitalised with COVID-19, followed up for all-cause mortality, was conducted. Secondary outcomes included cognitive and physical function at discharge. C-reactive protein and neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio were used as measures of immune activity. RESULTS: Cardinal COVID-19 symptoms (fever, dyspnoea, cough) were common but not universal. Inflammation on hospitalisation was lower in frail older adults. Fever, dyspnoea, delirium and inflammation were associated with mortality. Delirium at presentation was an independent risk factor for cognitive decline at discharge. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 may present without cardinal symptoms as well as implicate a possible role for age-related changes in immunity in mediating the relationship between frailty and mortality.

Outcomes from COVID-19 across the range of frailty: excess mortality in fitter older people.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to quantify the mortality from COVID-19 and identify any interactions with frailty and other demographic factors. METHODS: Hospitalised patients aged ≥ 70 were included, comparing COVID-19 cases with non-COVID-19 controls admitted over the same period. Frailty was prospectively measured and mortality ascertained through linkage with national and local statutory reports. RESULTS: In 217 COVID-19 cases and 160 controls, older age and South Asian ethnicity, though not socioeconomic position, were associated with higher mortality. For frailty, differences in effect size were evident between cases (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93-1.12) and controls (HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.46-2.72), with an interaction term (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37-0.71) in multivariable models. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that (1) frailty is not a good discriminator of prognosis in COVID-19 and (2) pathways to mortality may differ in fitter compared with frailer older patients.

Functional and cognitive outcomes after COVID-19 delirium.

PURPOSE: To ascertain delirium prevalence and outcomes in COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a point-prevalence study in a cohort of COVID-19 inpatients at University College Hospital. Delirium was defined by DSM-IV criteria. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 4 weeks; secondary outcomes were physical and cognitive function. RESULTS: In 71 patients (mean age 61, 75% men), 31 (42%) had delirium, of which only 12 (39%) had been recognised by the clinical team. At 4 weeks, 20 (28%) had died, 26 (36%) were interviewed by telephone and 21 (30%) remained as inpatients. Physical function was substantially worse in people after delirium - 50 out of 166 points (95% CI - 83 to - 17, p = 0.01). Mean cognitive scores at follow-up were similar and delirium was not associated with mortality in this sample. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that delirium is common, yet under-recognised. Delirium is associated with functional impairments in the medium term.

Comparing associations between frailty and mortality in hospitalised older adults with or without COVID-19 infection: a retrospective observational study using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe outcomes in hospitalised older people with different levels of frailty and COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We undertook a single-centre, retrospective cohort study examining COVID-19-related mortality using electronic health records, for older people (65 and over) with frailty, hospitalised with or without COVID-19 infection. Baseline covariates included demographics, early warning scores, Charlson Comorbidity Indices and frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale, CFS), linked to COVID-19 status. FINDINGS: We analysed outcomes on 1,071 patients with COVID-19 test results (285 (27%) were positive for COVID-19). The mean age at ED arrival was 79.7 and 49.4% were female. All-cause mortality (by 30 days) rose from 9 (not frail) to 33% (severely frail) in the COVID-negative cohort but was around 60% for all frailty categories in the COVID-positive cohort. In adjusted analyses, the hazard ratio for death in those with COVID-19 compared to those without COVID-19 was 7.3 (95% CI: 3.00, 18.0) with age, comorbidities and illness severity making small additional contributions. INTERPRETATION: In this study, frailty measured using the CFS appeared to make little incremental contribution to the hazard of dying in older people hospitalised with COVID-19 infection; illness severity and comorbidity had a modest association with the overall adjusted hazard of death, whereas confirmed COVID-19 infection dominated, with a sevenfold hazard for death.