Subjective Assessment Underestimates Fraility in Patients With Heart Failure Referred for Advanced Therapies

Abstract

Assessment of frailty is key for evaluation for advanced therapies (ATs). Most programs use a subjective provider assessment (SPA) or “eye-ball” test; however, objective measures exist. The modified five-item Fried Frailty Index (mFFI) is a validated tool to assess frailty. We compared SPA to mFFI testing in patients referred for AT. We also compared levels of macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF), an inflammatory biomarker associated with worse outcomes in heart failure, between frail and not frail subjects. Seventy-eight patients referred for evaluation for AT underwent both SPA and mFFI testing. Three cardiac surgeons independently assessed patients for frailty (SPA). SPA significantly underestimated frailty compared with mFFI testing and correlation between SPA and mFFI was not strong (κ = 0.02–0.14). Providers were correct 84% of the time designating a subject as frail, but only 40% of the time designating as not frail. Agreement between all three providers was robust (76%), which was primarily driven by designation as not frail. There was no significant difference in plasma MIF levels between frail and not frail subjects (47.6 ± 25.2 vs. 45.2 ± 18.9 ng/ml; p = 0.6). Clinicians significantly underestimate frailty but are usually correct when designating a patient as frail.