Geriatric Assessment Is Associated With Reduced Mortality at 1 Year for Older Adults Admitted to a Major Trauma Center: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of geriatrician review on 1-year mortality in older adults admitted with trauma. BACKGROUND: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been associated with improved outcomes in older adults with hip fracture, but has not been evaluated in a broader trauma population. METHODS: Trauma patients aged ≥ 65years admitted to an English Major Trauma Centre between November 2018 and September 2019 were included. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts: no geriatric assessment, reactive geriatric assessment, and proactive CGA. The primary outcome was time to mortality, secondary outcomes were time to discharge and frequency of complications. Analyses were adjusted for factors known to be associated with outcomes including age, frailty, injury severity, and complications. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-five patients were included (no geriatric assessment = 125; reactive geriatric assessment = 134; proactive CGA = 326): median age was 81 years (IQR 74-88); 326 (55.7%) were women; 297 (50.8%) were living with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale ≥5). Median Injury Severity Score was 13 (IQR9-25). At 1-year follow-up, 147 (25.1%) patients had died. In multivariate analysis, both types of geriatric assessment were associated with reduced mortality [reactive aHR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.18-0.53; proactive adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.41, 95% CI 0.26-0.64]. There was no association between either type of geriatric assessment and length of stay (reactive aHR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.62-1.15; proactive aHR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.63-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: Geriatrician assessment is associated with reduced mortality in older adults admitted following trauma. Further research should focus on defining optimal models of geriatrician intervention.

The Clinical Frailty Scale predicts adverse outcome in older people admitted to a UK major trauma centre.

BACKGROUND: Frailty assessment using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) has been mandated for older people admitted to English major trauma centres (MTC) since April 2019. Little evidence is available as to CFS-associated outcomes in the trauma population. OBJECTIVE: To investigate post-injury outcomes stratified by the CFS. METHODS: A single centre prospective observational cohort study was undertaken. CFS was prospectively assigned to patients ≥ 65 years old admitted to the MTC over a 5-month period. Primary outcome was 30-day post-injury mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, complications and discharge level of care. RESULTS: In 300 patients median age was 82; 146 (47%) were frail (CFS 5-9) and 28 (9.3%) severely frail (CFS 7-9). Frail patients had lower injury severity scores (median 9 vs 16) but greater 30-day mortality (CFS 5-6 odds ratio (OR) 5.68; P < 0.01; CFS 7-9 OR 10.38; P < 0.01). Frailty was associated with delirium (29.5% vs 17.5%; P = 0.02), but not complication rate (50.7% vs 41.6%; P = 0.20) or length of hospital stay (13 vs 11 days; P = 0.35). Mild to moderate frailty was associated with increased care level at discharge (OR 2.31; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is an independent predictor of 30-day mortality, inpatient delirium and increased care level at discharge in older people experiencing trauma. CFS can therefore be used to identify those at risk of poor outcome who may benefit from comprehensive geriatric review, validating its inclusion in the 2019 best practice tariff for major trauma.