Vulnerable Elderly Survey 13 as a Screening Method for Frailty in Polish Elderly Surgical Patient - Prospective Study

Kenig, Jakub; Richter, Piotr; Żychiewicz, Beata; Olszewska, Urszula

doi:10.2478/pjs-2014-0024

Cited by 10 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After title, abstract, and full-text review, 18 articles 12,13,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] reporting 17 studies were included from 11 380 citations (eFigure 1 in the Supplement). An abstract included in the previous review and subsequently published in a peer-reviewed journal was included.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Median sample size was 108 (range, 28-1435) patients. Only 5 studies 23,24,28,36,38 reported follow-up duration (30 days-12 months). Ten studies 12,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]38 included mixed cancer populations, with fewer studies reporting hematological malignant neoplasms (n = 5), [31][32][33][34][35] head and neck cancer (n = 1), 36 and prostate cancer (n = 1).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Screening Tools for Identifying Older Adults With Cancer Who May Benefit From a Geriatric Assessment

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCEOlder adults with cancer are at risk of overtreatment or undertreatment when decision-making is based solely on chronological age. Although a geriatric assessment is recommended to inform care, the time and expertise required limit its feasibility for all patients. Screening tools offer the potential to identify those who will benefit most from a geriatric assessment. Consensus about the optimal tool to use is lacking.OBJECTIVE To appraise the evidence on screening tools used for older adults with cancer and identify an optimal screening tool for older adults with cancer who may benefit from geriatric assessment.EVIDENCE REVIEW Systematic review of 4 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL [Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature], and PubMed) with narrative synthesis from January 1, 2000, to March 14, 2019. Studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy and use of validated screening tools to identify older adults with cancer who need a geriatric assessment were eligible for inclusion. Data were analyzed from March 14, 2019, to March 23, 2020.FINDINGS Seventeen unique studies were included, reporting on the use of 12 screening tools. Most studies were prospective cohort studies (n = 11) with only 1 randomized clinical trial. Not all studies reported time taken to administer the screening tools. The Geriatric-8 (G8) (n = 12) and the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) (n = 9) were the most frequently evaluated screening tools. The G8 scored better in sensitivity and the VES-13 in specificity. Other screening tools evaluated include the Groningen Frailty Index, abbreviated comprehensive geriatric assessment, and Physical Performance Test in 2 studies each. All other screening tools were evaluated in 1 study each. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCETo date, the G8 and VES-13 have the most evidence to recommend their use to inform the need for geriatric assessment. When choosing a screening tool, clinicians will need to weigh the tradeoffs between sensitivity and specificity. Future research needs to further validate or improve current screening tools and explore other factors that can influence their use, such as ease of use and resourcing.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening Tools for Identifying Older Adults With Cancer Who May Benefit From a Geriatric Assessment

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13) or Geriatric 8 (G8) [ 21 ], that are quick-to-administer but the gold standard is a detailed geriatric assessment which is an efficient and objective assessment tool that can identify frail older patients [ 1 ]. However, the aim of GA is not only to identify a frail individual but also to recognize the subclinical conditions (GA identify up to 40% of new age-related problems that were not detected in standard clinical management) [ 22 ], specific health needs of older patient and to design an intervention that can decrease the frailty and allow safe surgical treatment. GA in preoperative assessment is well described in general surgery, thoracic surgery, and orthopaedics [ 23 ], but not in urology.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frailty, geriatric assessment and prehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing urological surgery – is there a need for change of the daily clinical practice? Synthesis of the available literature

Michalik¹,

Maciukiewicz²,

Drewa

et al. 2020

Cent european J Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The population of older people is heterogeneous and constantly growing. Over 50% of urological operations are performed in elderly patients. Some elderly patients present with frailty syndrome – a state of increased vulnerability to external stressors resulting in increased risk of hospitalizations, adverse treatment outcomes and death. Currently, there is no widely accepted system of qualification and preparation for surgical treatment developed specifically for elderly patients. Material and methods We searched Medline/Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Libraries databases from 2000–2020 (week 5). The following medical subject headings (MeSH) terms were used to ensure the sensitivity of the searches: geriatric assessment, frailty, urology, and prehabilitation. Relevant articles were also identified through a manual search of the reference lists of potentially relevant articles. Results A total of 23 papers met the criteria and were included in the current study. Screening for frailty seems to be promising in predicting adverse outcomes, but frail patients should undergo detailed geriatric assessment (GA) which may indicate a need for preoperative intervention which can be unavailable during the hospitalization. The concept of prehabilitation is becoming increasingly discussed in thoracic and abdominal surgery, but only a few studies are available in the field of urology. Conclusions Geriatric assessment seems to be a valuable tool for urologists in daily clinical practice. A proper form of prehabilitation may provide enhanced recovery after surgery.

show abstract

“…23 Another study has estimated the CGA-oriented 'fragility' syndrome in patients aged >65, wherein 78% of the VES-13 score has been determined to demonstrate fragility syndrome. 22 Maia et al (2012) have also stated that the scale is valid and reliable as well as easy to implement. The scale with a 0.70 Cronbach's alpha value defines the vulnerable group at a better level 24 .…”

Section: Relationship Between Ves-13tr and Activities Of Daily Livingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a statistically significant relationship between VES-13Tr and ADL (p<0.001; Studies investigating whether the scale is valid and reliable have been carried out in different countries. 13,15,16,[22][23][24][25] In all these studies, a score of three has been considered as the breakpoint. In addition, the scale has been found to be highly reliable in CGA.…”

Section: Relationship Between Ves-13tr and Activities Of Daily Livingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural adaptation, Reliability and Validity of the Turkish version of the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13)

BERŞE

SAMANCIOGLU

2021

Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim is to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Vulnerable Elders Survey. This study is a methodological study. The survey was applied to 242 patients aging 74 or more. To collect data, the socio-demographic form, the Vulnerable Elder Survey, the Katz Activity of Daily Life and the Lawton&Brody Instrumental Activity of Daily Life surveys were used. The research data were collected with a socio-demographic and clinical properties of the elderly patients and with the Vulnerable Elders Survey-Turkish Version (VES-13Tr). For the analysis of the data, Kendall's coefficient of concordance, factor analysis, Cronbach alpha coefficient, Pearson correlation analysis and student t test were used. For the language validity of the scale, the translationretranslation method was used. As for the content validity, the field experts reached consensus (Kendall's = 0.435, p > 0.05). Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) coefficient that applied to the scale has found to be 0.898 and the Barlet test result has been found highly significant (x2 = 1589.773, p = 0.000). For VES-13Tr, the total-item test correlation values range from 0.33 to 0.72 and the Cronbach's alpha value has been calculated as 0.85. Considering the results of the survey, it was found out that the adapted version of the VES-13 could be valid and reliable tool and that the VES-13 could be used for the evaluation of geriatric assessment.

show abstract

Vulnerable Elderly Survey 13 as a Screening Method for Frailty in Polish Elderly Surgical Patient - Prospective Study

Cited by 10 publications

References 20 publications

Screening Tools for Identifying Older Adults With Cancer Who May Benefit From a Geriatric Assessment

Screening Tools for Identifying Older Adults With Cancer Who May Benefit From a Geriatric Assessment

Frailty, geriatric assessment and prehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing urological surgery – is there a need for change of the daily clinical practice? Synthesis of the available literature

Cultural adaptation, Reliability and Validity of the Turkish version of the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About