Quantifying the added value of 2 common frailty measures for predicting adverse outcomes after elective hysterectomy
Abstract
Importance: Although frailty is predictive of adverse outcomes in predominantly male general and orthopedic surgical populations, the utility of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program–based frailty measurement for hysterectomy is unclear. Objectives: The objective of this study was to measure the added contribution of the modified frailty index (mFI) and Risk Analysis Index (RAI) for predicting adverse outcomes after hysterectomy. Study Design: A secondary analysis of the 2011 to 2014 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement database was conducted. Benign elective hysterectomy by any route was included. The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes were major (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) and minor (grade 1–2) complications. The fraction of new prognostic information attributable to each frailty measure was estimated by the ratio of model likelihood-ratio χ 2 values compared with a baseline model, including American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, age, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, and surgical route. Results: Among 70,649 cases, 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9–3.1) were readmitted within 30 days and 2.8% (95% CI, 2.7–2.9) and 5.2% (95% CI, 5.0–5.4) had major and minor complications, respectively. The RAI provided a greater fraction of new prognostic information than the mFI when predicting readmission (4.8 vs 2.7%) and major complications (4.8 vs 2.3%). Interaction analysis showed a stronger association of frailty and outcomes among individuals undergoing abdominal hysterectomy and with BMI of 40 of higher or less than 20. Conclusions: The RAI and mFI provided modest improvement in the ability to predict adverse outcomes, which limits its clinical utility. Surgeons may consider selective utilization among those individuals undergoing abdominal hysterectomy or with BMI of 40 of higher or less than 20.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many studies addressing perioperative outcomes and frailty, including in gynecologic surgery, are retrospective in nature or database driven.
“Many studies--including those looking at gynecologic surgery--addressing perioperative outcomes and frailty are retrospective in nature or database driven leaving opportunity for further understanding the impact of frailty on gynecologic surgery outcomes in prospective surgical trials.7–16”
Cites
A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people
Rockwood, K. (2005) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050051 · Cited by 8,968 · see citing works
Schafer, J. L. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800102 · Cited by 3,949 · see citing works
The Frailty Syndrome: Definition and Natural History
Xue, Q. (2010) · Clinics in Geriatric Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.cger.2010.08.009 · Cited by 2,067 · see citing works
How can I deal with missing data in my study?
Bennett, D. A. (2001) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1111/j.1467-842x.2001.tb00294.x · Cited by 1,656 · see citing works
New 5-Factor Modified Frailty Index Using American College of Surgeons NSQIP Data
Subramaniam, S., Aalberg, J. J., Soriano, R. P., & Divino, C. M. (2017) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.11.005 · Cited by 1,088 · see citing works
Velanovich, V., Antoine, H. J., Swartz, A., Peters, D. A., & Rubinfeld, I. S. (2013) · Journal of Surgical Research · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2013.01.021 · Cited by 805 · see citing works
Measuring Frailty in Medicare Data: Development and Validation of a Claims-Based Frailty Index
Kim, D. H., Schneeweiß, S., Glynn, R. J., Lipsitz, L. A., Rockwood, K. J., & Avorn, J. (2017) · The Journals of Gerontology Series A · doi:10.1093/gerona/glx229 · Cited by 628 · see citing works
Hall, D. E., Arya, S., Schmid, K. K., Blaser, C., Carlson, M. A., Bailey, T. L., Purviance, G., Bockman, T., Lynch, T. G., & Johanning, J. M. (2016) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4202 · Cited by 489 · see citing works
Hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 1997 through 2005.
Merrill, R. M. (2008) · PubMed · Cited by 297 · see citing works
Association of the Modified Frailty Index With 30-Day Surgical Readmission
Wahl, T. S., Graham, L. A., Hawn, M. T., Richman, J., Hollis, R. H., Jones, C. E., Copeland, L. A., Burns, E. A., Itani, K. M. F., & Morris, M. S. (2017) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.1025 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
Morgan, D. M., Kamdar, N. S., Swenson, C. W., Kobernik, E. K., Sammarco, A. G., & Nallamothu, B. K. (2017) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.218 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Prediction versus aetiology: common pitfalls and how to avoid them
van Diepen, M., Ramspek, C. L., Jager, K. J., Zoccali, C., & Dekker, F. W. (2017) · Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfw459 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Measuring frailty in younger populations: a rapid review of evidence
Spiers, G., Kunonga, P., Hall, A., Beyer, F. R., Boulton, E., Parker, S. G., Bower, P., Craig, D., Todd, C. J., & Hanratty, B. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047051 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Rothenberg, K. A., Stern, J. R., George, E., Trickey, A. W., Morris, A. M., Hall, D. E., Johanning, J. M., Hawn, M. T., & Arya, S. (2019) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.4330 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Association is not prediction: A landscape of confused reporting in diabetes – A systematic review
Varga, T. V., Niss, K., Estampador, A. C., Collin, C. B., & Moseley, P. L. (2020) · Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108497 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
George, E., Burke, W. M., Hou, J., Tergas, A. I., Chen, L., Neugut, A. I., Ananth, C., Hershman, D., & Wright, J. (2015) · BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13598 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Postoperative 30-day Readmission
Morris, M. S., Graham, L. A., Richman, J., Hollis, R. H., Jones, C. E., Wahl, T. S., Itani, K. M. F., Mull, H. J., Rosen, A. K., Copeland, L. A., et al. (2016) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001855 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Lycke, K. D., Kahlert, J. A., Damgaard, R. K., Mogensen, O. E., & Hammer, A. (2021) · Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.2147/clep.s300394 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Suskind, A. M., Jin, C., Walter, L. C., & Finlayson, E. V. A. (2016) · The Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.12.001 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Perioperative Safety of Surgery for Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Elderly and Frail Patients
Chapman, G. C., Sheyn, D. D., Slopnick, E. A., Hijaz, A. K., Mahajan, S. T., Mangel, J. M., & El‐Nashar, S. A. (2020) · Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003682 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Steiner, C., Karaca, Z., Moore, B. J., Imshaug, M. C., & PICKENS, G. T. (2006) · Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville (MD) eBooks · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Boyd, P. J., Nevard, M., Ford, J. A., Khondoker, M. R., Cross, J., & Fox, C. (2018) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/afy181 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Chambers, L., Chalif, J., Yao, M., Chichura, A. M., Morton, M. A., Gruner, M., Costales, A. B., Horowitz, M. P., Chau, D. B., Vargas, R., et al. (2021) · Gynecologic Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.05.013 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Bj, M., Ca, S., Davis, P. J., Stocks, C., & Ml, B. (2006) · Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Rockville (MD) eBooks · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Erekson, E., Menefee, S. A., Whitworth, R., Gizlice, S., Zyczynski, H. M., Rahn, D. D., Amundsen, C. L., Sung, V. W., Arya, L. A., Ferrando, C. A., et al. (2026) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2025.11.002
Zuo, S. W., Kohn, J. R., Chen, C. C. G., Tellechea, L. M., Roberts, H., Agalliu, I., Leegant, A., Abraham, N., & Laudano, M. A. (2023) · Urogynaecologia · doi:10.4081/uij.2023.309
The 5-Item Modified Frailty Index Predicts Postoperative Complications After Cochlear Implantation
Wen, C. Z., Fong, D. C., Puc, M., & Kaufman, A. C. (2025) · Otology & Neurotology · doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000004642
- Authors
- Luchristt, D., Siddiqui, N. Y., Bretschneider, C. E., & Jelovsek, J. E.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Luchristt, Douglas
- Siddiqui, Nazema Y.
- Jelovsek, J. Eric
- Venue
- Urogynecology
- Published
- 2022-05-05
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 526-532
- ISSN
- 2151-8378 (ISSN-L)
- 2771-1897
- OpenAlex
- W4280536016
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 0.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Urogynecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
- Keywords
- frailty, modified frailty index, Risk Analysis Index, elective hysterectomy, postoperative complications, 30-day readmission, abdominal hysterectomy, body mass index, outcome prediction
- MeSH terms
- Frailty, Female, Humans, Hysterectomy, Male, Postoperative Complications, Elective Surgical Procedures, Risk Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
