Clinical frailty and performance scale translation in palliative care: scoping review.
Clinical assessment
Clinical decisions
Communication
Prognosis
Supportive care
Journal
BMJ supportive & palliative care
ISSN: 2045-4368
Titre abrégé: BMJ Support Palliat Care
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101565123
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jun 2022
01 Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
04
04
2022
accepted:
05
04
2022
entrez:
1
6
2022
pubmed:
2
6
2022
medline:
2
6
2022
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Frailty is associated with advancing age and increases the risk of adverse outcomes and death. Routine assessment of frailty is becoming more common in a number of healthcare settings, but not in palliative care, where performance scales (eg, the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status Scale (AKPS)) are more commonly employed. A shared understanding of performance and frailty measures could aid interspecialty collaboration in both end-of-life care research and clinical practice. To identify and synthesise evidence comparing measures of performance routinely collected in palliative care with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and create a conversion chart to support interspecialty communication. A scoping literature review with comprehensive searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid SP, the Cochrane Library and reference lists. Eligible articles compared the CFS with the AKPS, Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), Karnofsky Performance Scale or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status or compared these performance scales, in patients aged Searches retrieved 3124 articles. Two articles directly compared CFS to the PPS. Thirteen studies translated between different performance scores, facilitating subsequent conversion to CFS, specifically: AKPS/PPS 10/20=very severe frailty, AKPS/PPS 30=severe frailty, AKPS/PPS 40/50=moderate frailty, AKPS/PPS60=mild frailty. We present a tool for converting between the CFS and performance measures commonly used in palliative care. A small number of studies provided evidence for the direct translation between CFS and the PPS. Therefore, more primary evidence is needed from a wider range of population settings, and performance measures to support this conversion.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Frailty is associated with advancing age and increases the risk of adverse outcomes and death. Routine assessment of frailty is becoming more common in a number of healthcare settings, but not in palliative care, where performance scales (eg, the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status Scale (AKPS)) are more commonly employed. A shared understanding of performance and frailty measures could aid interspecialty collaboration in both end-of-life care research and clinical practice.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
To identify and synthesise evidence comparing measures of performance routinely collected in palliative care with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and create a conversion chart to support interspecialty communication.
METHODS
METHODS
A scoping literature review with comprehensive searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid SP, the Cochrane Library and reference lists. Eligible articles compared the CFS with the AKPS, Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), Karnofsky Performance Scale or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status or compared these performance scales, in patients aged
RESULTS
RESULTS
Searches retrieved 3124 articles. Two articles directly compared CFS to the PPS. Thirteen studies translated between different performance scores, facilitating subsequent conversion to CFS, specifically: AKPS/PPS 10/20=very severe frailty, AKPS/PPS 30=severe frailty, AKPS/PPS 40/50=moderate frailty, AKPS/PPS60=mild frailty.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We present a tool for converting between the CFS and performance measures commonly used in palliative care. A small number of studies provided evidence for the direct translation between CFS and the PPS. Therefore, more primary evidence is needed from a wider range of population settings, and performance measures to support this conversion.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35649714
pii: bmjspcare-2022-003658
doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2022-003658
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.