Explore the vast range of titles available.

Key summary points Aim To determine the prevalence of frailty among older people attending emergency care. Findings Across 14 European countries, 40% of older people using emergency care were living with at least mild frailty. 14% of all adult users were older people with frailty. Message The high prevalence of frailty in emergency care indicates the need to accordingly configure healthcare systems and plan workforces. Introduction Current emergency care systems are not optimized to respond to multiple and complex problems associated with frailty. Services may require reconfiguration to effectively deliver comprehensive frailty care, yet its prevalence and variation are poorly understood. This study primarily determined the prevalence of frailty among older people attending emergency care. Methods This cross-sectional study used a flash mob approach to collect observational European emergency care data over a 24-h period (04 July 2023). Sites were identified through the European Task Force for Geriatric Emergency Medicine collaboration and social media. Data were collected for all individuals aged 65 + who attended emergency care, and for all adults aged 18 + at a subset of sites. Variables included demographics, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), vital signs, and disposition. European and national frailty prevalence was determined with proportions with each CFS level and with dichotomized CFS 5 + (mild or more severe frailty). Results Sixty-two sites in fourteen European countries recruited five thousand seven hundred eighty-five individuals. 40% of 3479 older people had at least mild frailty, with countries ranging from 26 to 51%. They had median age 77 (IQR, 13) years and 53% were female. Across 22 sites observing all adult attenders, older people living with frailty comprised 14%. Conclusion 40% of older people using European emergency care had CFS 5 + . Frailty prevalence varied widely among European care systems. These differences likely reflected entrance selection and provide windows of opportunity for system configuration and workforce planning.

Background and objectivesNeuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are common in older people with cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). No biomarkers to detect the related pathology or predict the clinical evolution of NPS are available yet. This study aimed to identify plasma proteins that may serve as biomarkers for NPS and NPS-related clinical disease progression.MethodsA panel of 190 plasma proteins was quantified using Luminex xMAP in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. NPS and cognitive performance were assessed at baseline and after 1 and 2 years. Logistic regression, receiver operating characteristic analysis and cross-validation were used to address the relations of interest.ResultsA total of 507 participants with mild cognitive impairment (n=396) or mild AD dementia (n=111) were considered. Selected plasma proteins improved the prediction of NPS (area under the curve (AUC) from 0.61 to 0.76, p<0.001) and future NPS (AUC from 0.63 to 0.80, p<0.001) when added to a reference model. Distinct protein panels were identified for single symptoms. Among the selected proteins, ANGT, CCL1 and IL3 were associated with NPS at all three time points while CCL1, serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase and complement factor H were also associated with cognitive decline. The associations were independent of the presence of cerebral AD pathology as assessed using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers.ConclusionsPlasma proteins are associated with NPS and improve prediction of future NPS.

The development of secondary bacterial infections in COVID-19 patients has been associated with increased mortality and worse clinical outcomes. Consequently, many patients have received empirical antibiotic therapies with the potential to further exacerbate an ongoing antimicrobial resistance crisis. The pandemic has seen a rise in the use of procalcitonin testing to guide antimicrobial prescribing, although its value remains elusive. This single-centre retrospective study sought to analyse the efficacy of procalcitonin in identifying secondary infections in COVID-19 patients and evaluate the proportion of patients prescribed antibiotics to those with confirmed secondary infection. Inclusion criteria comprised patients admitted to the Grange University Hospital intensive care unit with SARS-CoV-2 infection throughout the second and third waves of the pandemic. Data collected included daily inflammatory biomarkers, antimicrobial prescriptions, and microbiologically proven secondary infections. There was no statistically significant difference between PCT, WBC, or CRP values in those with an infection versus those without. A total of 57.02% of patients had a confirmed secondary infection, with 80.2% prescribed antibiotics in Wave 2, compared to 44.07% with confirmed infection and 52.1% prescribed antibiotics in Wave 3. In conclusion, procalcitonin values failed to indicate the emergence of critical care-acquired infection in COVID-19 patients.