{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022095509622238062, 'fraction_numerical': 0.024946543121881683, 'mean_word_length': 5.131004366812227, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Investigation on the use and acceptability of the Edmonton Frail Scale in a rural primary care setting

This study investigated GP acceptance and practical application of the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) in a rural primary care practice. Primary health care providers identify patients at risk of negative health outcomes and hospitalisation and then provide appropriate interventions. The annual ‘75+ health assessment’ 75+HA is a part of the ‘Enhanced Primary Care’ package introduced in 1999 by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care as a financial incentive for GPs to identify and offer intervention for medical conditions and potential risk factors for poor health in people aged 75 years and over. However, the 75+HA has a number of limitations: it has not been updated,1 takes between 30 and 60 min to complete, and from 1999 to 2010, only 20% of age‐eligible adults actually had the 75+HA.2 
 
An alternative assessment of frailty might identify at‐risk patients earlier, consume less practitioner time and have better uptake than the 75+HA. Frailty is related to the ageing process, with an accelerated decline in the ability of bodily systems to respond to and recover from physical insult.3 Internationally, assessment of frailty in older patients by primary care physicians is government‐funded4, 5 to identify patients at risk of poor health outcomes and future hospitalisation.