Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2025

Author Spotlight: Assessing Surgical Frailty with Point-of-Care Ultrasound of Quadriceps Muscles
Published on: July 26, 2024
Frailty Screening in the Emergency Department: Comparing the Variable Indicative of Placement Risk, Clinical Frailty
Rónán O'Caoimh1,2, Jane McGauran1, Mark R O'Donovan2
1Mercy University Hospital, Grenville Place, T12 WE28 Cork, Ireland.
Promptly identifying frailty in the emergency department (ED) is crucial. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and PRISMA-7 demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy compared to the Variable Indicative of Placement (VIP) risk tools.
Area of Science:
- Gerontology
- Emergency Medicine
- Diagnostic Accuracy
Background:
- Prompt identification of frailty in emergency departments (EDs) is vital for managing patients at high risk of adverse outcomes.
- Existing research often prioritizes predictive validity over diagnostic accuracy for frailty screening instruments.
- There is a need to evaluate the diagnostic performance of commonly used, short frailty screening tools in the ED setting.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the diagnostic accuracy of three common short frailty screening instruments against a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA).
- To determine which frailty screening tools are most effective for identifying frail older adults in an urban university hospital ED.
Main Methods:
- A comparative diagnostic accuracy study was conducted in an urban university hospital ED.
- Consecutive patients aged 70 years and older were screened using the Variable Indicative of Placement (VIP) risk (3 and 4-item versions), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and PRISMA-7, blinded to CGA results.
- Accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), comparing screening tools against a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA).
Main Results:
- A total of 197 patients (median age 79) were included, with 49% identified as frail by CGA.
- The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) (AUROC: 0.91) and PRISMA-7 (AUROC: 0.90) showed higher diagnostic accuracy than the VIP-4 (AUROC: 0.84) and VIP-3 (AUROC: 0.84).
- The CFS was significantly more accurate than both VIP versions (p < 0.05), with no significant difference between CFS and PRISMA-7 (p = 0.90).
Conclusions:
- The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and PRISMA-7 are more accurate than the VIP (3 or 4-item versions) for identifying frailty in the ED.
- These findings suggest that CFS and PRISMA-7 should be prioritized for frailty screening in emergency departments.
- Effective frailty screening in the ED can improve patient outcomes by identifying high-risk individuals for targeted interventions.
More Related Videos
05:53Measuring Frailty in HIV-infected Individuals. Identification of Frail Patients is the First Step to Amelioration and Reversal of Frailty
Published on: July 24, 2013
07:27Exergaming in Older People Living with HIV Improves Balance, Mobility and Ameliorates Some Aspects of Frailty
Published on: October 6, 2016