Frailty in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Comparisons Among Three Frailty Screening Tools in Predicting In-Hospital Adverse Events

Anh Huynh Phuong Nguyen,Hung Manh Pham,T. Nguyen,T. Nguyen,H. Nguyen,T. H. T. Nguyen,H. Nguyen,A. Nguyen,Q. N. Nguyen,G. Tran,H. T. Vu

Published 2025 in Sage open aging

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The aims of the study were to investigate the proportion of frailty among inpatients having Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) and to compare the prognostic value of three frailty screening methods in predicting in-hospital adverse events among the study population. Methods: This prospective, observational study design was conducted on older patients with ACS. Data was collected using a structured questionnaire on general characteristics (age, gender, comorbidities, body mass index) and medical records (admission diagnosis, ACS type, angiography results, treatment therapy, left ventrical ejection fraction, and length of hospital stay). Frailty was assessed using three frailty screening scales: Reported Edmonton Frail Scale (REFS), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and Frail Scale (FS). Results: A total of 116 older patients, the mean age was 72.9 (SD: 6.2) years. Prevalence of frailty in older inpatients with ACS was 44.8%, 35.3%, and 32.7% according to REFS; CFS, and FS, respectively. In addition, 75.9% were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and the length of hospitalization was 6.3 (SD: 3.8) days. The AUC in the prognosis of net adverse clinical events (NACE) for patients with ACS was 0.74 (with REFS ≥ 7 points), 0.76 (with CFS ≥ 5 points), and 0.80 (with FS ≥ 2 points). Kappa values of 0.49, 0.57, and 0.47 were observed for REFS, CFS, and FS. Conclusion: This study compared three frailty screening tools in predicting in-hospital adverse events among Acute Coronary Syndrome. The Frail Scale showed the highest value to predict NACE and demonstrated its superiority over other frailty scales.

PUBLICATION RECORD

CITATION MAP

EXTRACTION MAP

CLAIMS

  • No claims are published for this paper.

CONCEPTS

  • No concepts are published for this paper.

REFERENCES

Showing 1-27 of 27 references · Page 1 of 1

CITED BY

  • No citing papers are available for this paper.

Showing 0-0 of 0 citing papers · Page 1 of 1