Publications

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether there is an association between nonwhite race and frailty among older adults presenting to an academic nononcologic urology practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective study of individuals ages ≥65years presenting to a nononcologic urology practice between December 2015 and November 2016. All individuals had a Timed Up and Go Test (TUGT, where a slower TUGT time of ≥15 seconds is suggestive of frailty. TUGT times, race (white vs nonwhite), and other clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical record using direct queries. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the association between race and slower TUGT times while adjusting for age, gender, number of medications, body mass index, and number of urologic diagnoses.

RESULTS

Among the 1715 individuals in our cohort, 33.9% were of nonwhite race and 15.3% had TUGT ≥15 seconds. A higher percentage of nonwhite individuals had TUGT times ≥15 seconds compared to white individuals (23.6% vs 11.1%, P <.01). TUGT times ≥15 seconds were significantly associated with nonwhite race after adjusting for clinical factors (adjusted odds ratio 2.5, 95% confidence interval 1.8-3.3).

CONCLUSION

Among older adults presenting to an academic nononcologic urology practice, nonwhite race was associated with increased odds of frailty. A greater understanding of the relationship between race and frailty is needed to better address the needs of this vulnerable population.

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery is a multidisciplinary stakeholder group that aims to systematically improve the surgical care of older adults by establishing a verifiable quality improvement program with standards based on best evidence. Prior work confirmed the validity of a preliminary set of 308 standards to improve the quality of geriatric surgery, but concerns exist as to whether the standards are feasible for hospitals to implement.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to utilize data gained from a multi-institutional survey and interview to improve the scalability and generalizability of a geriatric quality improvement program.

METHODS

Using a survey followed by a targeted debrief interview, 15 hospitals gathered an interdisciplinary panel to answer whether each standard was already in place at their institution, and if not, the perceived difficulty of implementation according to a five-point Likert scale (from 1 [very easy] to 5 [very difficult]). The standards were then placed into categories according to the hospital responses. Standards were designated "duplicative" if 11 or more hospitals reported baseline implementation, "prohibitively difficult" if 6 or more hospitals rated the standard as such, and "high potential" if they were neither duplicative nor difficult. A targeted debrief interview was then conducted with each participating hospital.

RESULTS

Fifteen participating hospitals evaluated the feasibility of 108 standards and found 28 (26%) duplicative, 35 (32%) too difficult, and 45 (42%) high potential. Of the 108 standards, 49 (45%) were selected for the next iteration of standards, and 59 were removed. Among the standards that were removed, the majority (64%) were rated duplicative and/or difficult.

CONCLUSION

A multi-institutional survey and interview successfully identified care standards that were redundant or too difficult to implement on the hospital level. These data will help improve the generalizability and scalability of the program while maintaining the overall goal of improving care. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1074-1078, 2019.