[Prognostic value of assessment tools on elderly patients with chronic advanced disease and end of life, admitted to an intermediate care centre].

OBJECTIVE: To apply 3advanced chronic disease evaluation tools in elderly patients admitted to an intermediate and long-term care centre, and evaluate its relationship with mortality. METHODS: The NECPAL tool, PROFUND prognostic index, and Charlson comorbidity index were applied to 87 patients. RESULTS: The NECPAL tool identified 31 patients (35.6%) in need of palliative care, and according to the PROFUND index, 45 (54.7%) had high/very high risk of mortality (≥7 points), and according to Charlson index, 31 (35.6%) had high comorbidity (≥4 points). Of the NECPAL positive patients, 80.5% had a PROFUND index score ≥7, and 48.3% a Charlson index ≥ 4. These percentages were 34.4% and 28.5% in negative NECPAL patients (P<.001 and P≤.06, respectively). Correlations between the 3tools: quantitative (Spearman) number of responses in NECPAL with PROFUND (r=.57; P<.001); with Charlson (r=.214; P<.047) and between PROFUND and Charlson (r=.157; P=.148). Qualitative (kappa) NECPAL (positive/negative) with PROFUND (cut-off 6/7) (0.40; P<.001), and Charlson (cut-off 3/4) (0.19; P=.080) and between PROFUND and Charlson (0.08; P=.399). Mortality prediction (area under the curve): NECPAL 3 months 0.81 (95% CI: 0.62-1.00); 6 months 0.71 (95% CI: 0.53-0.89) and 12 months 0.67 (95% CI: 0.52-0.82). PROFUND 3 months 0.71 (95% CI: 0.50-0.91); 6 months 0.73 (95% CI: 0.58-0.87), and 12 months 0.69 (95% CI: 0.57-0.81). Charlson 3 months 0.72 (95% CI: 0.52-0.91); 6 months 0.62 (95% CI: 0.45-0.80), and 12 months 0.64 (95% CI: 0.50-0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The 3tools were significantly associated with high mortality. A low concordance was found between the results of the different tools.