Frailty-Adjusted Anesthesia: Should Physiologic Age Replace Chronologic Age?

Introduction

Chronological age has traditionally been a major consideration in perioperative risk assessment, largely because advancing age is associated with a higher prevalence of chronic disease, declining organ function, and increased postoperative complications. However, age alone provides only a limited understanding of a patient’s ability to tolerate the physiological stress of anesthesia and surgery. While chronological age is simple to document and universally available, it is an imperfect surrogate for physiological reserve, functional capacity, and biological resilience. Increasing evidence suggests that reliance on age alone may lead to inaccurate risk stratification, inappropriate treatment decisions, and missed opportunities to optimize patient outcomes.

Clinical practice frequently demonstrates that individuals of the same chronological age can exhibit markedly different physiological profiles. For example, a physically active 82 year old who exercises regularly, maintains good nutritional status, manages medications independently, and remains cognitively intact may have substantially greater physiological reserve than a 68 year old with sarcopenia, recurrent falls, multiple chronic illnesses, polypharmacy, malnutrition, and mild cognitive impairment. Although the latter patient is chronologically younger, they may face considerably higher perioperative risk because their capacity to withstand surgical stress has been notably diminished. These differences illustrate why chronological age alone cannot adequately capture the complexity of aging or predict surgical outcomes.

Frailty has therefore emerged as a more clinically meaningful framework for evaluating older surgical patients. Rather than serving as a measure of age, frailty reflects a state of diminished biological reserve and reduced ability to maintain physiological homeostasis in response to acute stressors. These stressors include anesthesia, major surgery, infection, hospitalization, prolonged immobility, and other events that challenge multiple organ systems. Frail patients have reduced capacity to recover from these insults, making them more susceptible to postoperative complications, prolonged hospital stays, functional decline, institutionalization, and mortality.

Importantly, frailty should not be viewed as synonymous with old age. Although its prevalence increases with advancing age, frailty is a distinct clinical syndrome that can occur in younger adults with significant chronic illness and may be absent in many older individuals who remain healthy and functionally independent. This distinction emphasizes the importance of evaluating biological rather than chronological aging when planning perioperative care.

Frailty is a multidimensional condition involving the interaction of physical, cognitive, psychological, and social factors. Physical manifestations commonly include reduced muscle mass and strength, impaired mobility, slow gait speed, diminished endurance, weight loss, and decreased physical activity. Cognitive impairment may range from mild executive dysfunction to more significant deficits that affect decision making and postoperative recovery. Nutritional deficiencies, depression, anxiety, social isolation, limited caregiver support, multimorbidity, and extensive medication use further contribute to overall vulnerability. Together, these factors influence an individual’s capacity to tolerate physiological stress and recover following surgery.

Recognition of frailty has transformed perioperative medicine by shifting attention from isolated disease processes to comprehensive assessment of the whole patient. Numerous studies have demonstrated that frailty is an independent predictor of adverse surgical outcomes across a wide range of specialties, including general surgery, orthopedic surgery, vascular surgery, cardiac surgery, and oncologic procedures. Compared with non frail individuals, frail patients experience higher rates of postoperative complications, delirium, intensive care unit admission, prolonged mechanical ventilation, hospital readmission, functional decline, discharge to long term care facilities, and mortality. Importantly, these associations persist even after adjusting for age and comorbid conditions, highlighting the unique prognostic value of frailty assessment.

The incorporation of frailty into preoperative evaluation enables clinicians to move beyond traditional age based assumptions toward individualized risk stratification. Validated assessment tools such as the Clinical Frailty Scale, Fried Frailty Phenotype, Edmonton Frail Scale, and Modified Frailty Index provide structured methods for identifying vulnerable patients before surgery. These instruments assess domains including mobility, physical performance, cognition, nutrition, comorbidity burden, and functional independence, allowing clinicians to quantify physiological reserve more accurately than chronological age alone.

Frailty assessment also has important implications for shared decision making. Identifying frailty before surgery facilitates realistic discussions regarding operative risks, expected recovery trajectories, postoperative functional outcomes, and alignment of treatment with patient goals and preferences. In many cases, recognition of frailty provides opportunities for prehabilitation strategies that may improve physiological resilience before surgery. These interventions may include exercise training, nutritional optimization, medication review, treatment of anemia, cognitive support, and multidisciplinary geriatric assessment. Such approaches aim not only to reduce perioperative complications but also to preserve long term functional independence and quality of life.

Anesthetic management can likewise be individualized based on frailty status. Frail patients often require careful titration of anesthetic agents, meticulous fluid management, aggressive delirium prevention strategies, early mobilization, multimodal analgesia, and coordinated postoperative rehabilitation. Integrating frailty assessment into perioperative planning encourages collaboration among anesthesiologists, surgeons, geriatricians, physiotherapists, pharmacists, nurses, nutritionists, and social workers, resulting in a more comprehensive and patient centered model of care.

The fundamental question facing modern perioperative medicine is not whether chronological age should be eliminated from anesthetic planning, as age remains an important predictor of physiological change and disease burden. Rather, the more relevant question is whether perioperative teams should transition from decisions based primarily on chronological age to approaches informed by frailty and biological reserve. Current evidence strongly supports this evolution. Frailty provides a more accurate and clinically meaningful measure of surgical vulnerability, enabling personalized risk assessment, better informed clinical decision making, and targeted perioperative interventions.

As healthcare systems continue to care for an increasingly older surgical population, adopting frailty informed perioperative assessment represents an important advancement in patient centered medicine. By recognizing that biological age often differs substantially from chronological age, clinicians can move beyond simplistic assumptions and deliver more precise, individualized, and evidence-based care that improves both surgical outcomes and the overall quality of perioperative management.

Why frailty matters before anesthesia

Frailty has emerged as one of the strongest predictors of adverse perioperative outcomes in older adults undergoing surgery. Unlike chronological age alone, frailty reflects a multidimensional state of diminished physiological reserve and reduced capacity to maintain homeostasis when exposed to physical or psychological stress. As the global population continues to age and increasing numbers of older adults undergo complex surgical procedures, identifying frailty has become an essential component of preoperative evaluation. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that frailty provides prognostic information beyond traditional surgical risk factors and should play a central role in perioperative planning and shared clinical decision making.

Numerous studies have consistently shown that frailty is associated with significantly worse postoperative outcomes across a wide range of surgical specialties. Frail patients experience higher rates of postoperative complications, including infections, cardiovascular events, respiratory failure, acute kidney injury, and poor wound healing. They are also at substantially increased risk of postoperative delirium, prolonged hospital stays, discharge to rehabilitation or long term care facilities rather than home, functional decline, hospital readmission, and both short term and long term mortality. Importantly, these adverse outcomes often persist long after the immediate postoperative period, affecting quality of life, independence, and overall survival.

The relationship between frailty and poor surgical outcomes is biologically plausible. Frailty represents the cumulative effects of aging, chronic disease, nutritional deficiencies, sarcopenia, and impaired physiological adaptation. Frail individuals typically have reduced cardiovascular and pulmonary reserve, decreased skeletal muscle mass and strength, impaired mobility, diminished immune function, and lower tolerance to inflammatory and metabolic stress. They are also more likely to experience malnutrition, anemia, cognitive impairment, depression, polypharmacy, and multiple chronic medical conditions. Collectively, these factors reduce the body’s ability to recover from surgical trauma, anesthesia, blood loss, fluid shifts, and postoperative complications.

For anesthesia professionals, the recognition of frailty fundamentally changes the perioperative risk assessment process. Frailty should not be viewed as a binary criterion that determines whether surgery should or should not proceed. Instead, it should be considered a clinical framework that identifies patients who require more comprehensive evaluation, individualized perioperative planning, and enhanced postoperative support. The goal is not to deny potentially beneficial surgical treatment but to optimize care by anticipating vulnerabilities and implementing strategies that reduce avoidable complications.

Routine frailty assessment should therefore trigger a broader multidisciplinary evaluation. Once frailty is identified, clinicians should perform a more detailed assessment of functional status, nutritional health, cognition, medication use, mobility, and social support. Shared decision making becomes particularly important in this context, ensuring that patients and families have realistic expectations regarding surgical benefits, potential risks, recovery trajectories, and postoperative quality of life. Discussions should also incorporate patient values, preferences, and goals of care, particularly when considering major or high risk procedures.

Medication optimization is another critical component of perioperative management in frail patients. Polypharmacy is highly prevalent in this population and contributes to adverse drug reactions, falls, delirium, and prolonged recovery. Particular attention should be paid to medications with anticholinergic properties, sedative agents, opioids, and drugs associated with orthostatic hypotension or cognitive impairment. Comprehensive medication review before surgery provides opportunities to deprescribe unnecessary

Chronologic age still matters

Physiological age should complement rather than replace chronological age during perioperative assessment. Chronological age serves as an important initial indicator that prompts clinicians to perform a more comprehensive geriatric evaluation. Rather than making assumptions based solely on age, clinicians should use advancing age as a signal to assess frailty, cognitive function, functional independence, nutritional status, medication burden, social support, and goals of care. Frailty assessment then refines overall risk estimation and supports the development of individualized perioperative management strategies.

Ultimately, the practical message for clinicians is not to disregard chronological age but to move beyond it. Age alone provides an incomplete picture of surgical risk. Incorporating frailty assessment into routine preoperative evaluation allows healthcare teams to better understand physiological reserve, identify modifiable vulnerabilities, personalize perioperative care, and engage patients in informed shared decision making. As perioperative medicine continues to evolve toward more patient centered and individualized care, integrating frailty assessment alongside traditional risk evaluation offers an evidence based approach to improving surgical outcomes, preserving functional independence, and enhancing the quality of care for older adults undergoing surgery.

Frailty tools for perioperative practice

Several frailty tools can be used before surgery. The best tool depends on the setting, staffing, urgency of surgery, and intended use of the result.

The Clinical Frailty Scale is brief and practical. It summarizes global fitness and frailty using clinical judgment, functional status, and baseline activity. It is well suited for preoperative clinics, surgical wards, emergency settings, and multidisciplinary communication. It does require training because inaccurate scoring can misclassify robust patients as frail or frail patients as merely “old.”

The Fried frailty phenotype evaluates unintentional weight loss, exhaustion, weakness, slow gait speed, and low physical activity. It remains foundational in frailty research and provides objective functional information, but it can be too time-consuming for routine use in some perioperative clinics.

The Edmonton Frail Scale includes cognition, general health status, functional independence, social support, medication use, nutrition, mood, continence, and functional performance. It may be useful when a broader multidomain screen is needed.

The Hospital Frailty Risk Score uses diagnostic coding data to identify frailty at the population level. It can support research, service planning, and quality improvement, but it is less useful as a real-time bedside assessment because it depends on administrative data and may miss functional nuance.

The Risk Analysis Index is another practical tool used in surgical populations. It can support rapid risk stratification and may be easier to integrate into preoperative workflows than more time-intensive instruments.

No single tool is ideal for every institution. The goal is to choose a validated tool, train staff, define thresholds for action, and audit whether frailty screening actually changes care.

Table 1. Frailty tools for perioperative use

Tool	Best use	Main limitation
Clinical Frailty Scale	Rapid bedside or clinic screening	Requires training and clinical judgment
Fried phenotype	Research or detailed functional assessment	More time-consuming
Edmonton Frail Scale	Multidomain assessment	Longer than brief screening tools
Hospital Frailty Risk Score	Population-level screening using coded data	Less useful for immediate bedside decisions
Risk Analysis Index	Surgical risk stratification	Requires local workflow integration

What frailty screening should trigger

Frailty screening has limited value if it becomes another checkbox. It becomes clinically meaningful when it changes management.

A frail patient should prompt structured review of cognition, mobility, nutrition, medications, comorbid disease control, social support, discharge needs, and patient goals. When time permits, patients with moderate to severe frailty should be considered for comprehensive geriatric assessment. In urgent surgery, a full assessment may not be feasible, but targeted actions still matter. Medication reconciliation, delirium-risk review, pain planning, mobility planning, and postoperative disposition planning can occur even under time pressure.

Table 2. Practical actions after frailty screening

Finding	Why it matters	Practical response
CFS 5 or higher, or similar frailty threshold	Higher risk of complications, delirium, functional decline, and non-home discharge	Consider CGA, shared decision-making, and proactive recovery planning
Cognitive impairment or prior delirium	Higher delirium risk	Document baseline cognition; use delirium-prevention strategies
Polypharmacy	Higher risk of hypotension, sedation, falls, constipation, urinary retention, and delirium	Pharmacist-led medication review
High anticholinergic burden	Delirium, constipation, urinary retention, blurred vision, falls	Reduce avoidable anticholinergic exposure
Slow gait or falls	Immobility, deconditioning, discharge to facility	Early mobility plan and physical therapy
Malnutrition or weight loss	Poor wound healing, infection risk, delayed recovery	Nutrition assessment and protein-calorie optimization
Limited social support	Higher discharge complexity	Early social work and discharge planning
Unclear treatment goals	Risk of burdensome care that does not match patient priorities	Discuss expected recovery, alternatives, and escalation preferences

Anesthetic planning in frail patients

Frailty should influence anesthetic planning, but it should not mandate one anesthetic technique. General anesthesia, neuraxial anesthesia, regional anesthesia, and monitored anesthesia care can each be appropriate depending on the procedure and patient.

A common error is to assume that regional anesthesia is automatically safer for frail older adults. That is too simplistic. Large hip-fracture trials did not show a universal advantage of regional or spinal anesthesia over general anesthesia for major outcomes such as survival, ambulation recovery, or postoperative delirium. Regional techniques may still be useful for analgesia, opioid reduction, pulmonary mechanics, and selected procedures, but the decision should be individualized.

The better goal is physiologic stability. Frail patients may tolerate hypotension, hypoxemia, hypercarbia, anemia, excessive sedation, hypothermia, and fluid overload poorly. Monitoring should match the patient and the procedure. Some patients need only standard monitoring. Others may warrant arterial pressure monitoring, processed electroencephalographic monitoring, advanced hemodynamic assessment, or planned postoperative higher-acuity care.

Depth of anesthesia also matters. The goal is not simply “less anesthesia.” Too little anesthesia can increase sympathetic stress or awareness risk. Too much can worsen hypotension, delayed recovery, and respiratory depression. Frailty-informed anesthesia means careful titration to clinical response.

Medication and drug-safety considerations

Frailty often increases pharmacodynamic sensitivity. Older and frail patients may have lower lean body mass, altered protein binding, impaired autonomic compensation, reduced renal or hepatic clearance, and increased central nervous system sensitivity. These changes make slow titration and close monitoring more important than fixed dosing habits.

Propofol should be titrated carefully in elderly, debilitated, and higher-ASA-status patients. Rapid bolus dosing can increase cardiorespiratory depression. Midazolam also requires caution because older and debilitated patients may have increased sensitivity and delayed recovery. When benzodiazepines are not essential, avoidance or dose reduction is often appropriate, especially in patients with delirium risk.

Opioids remain important for analgesia, but frail patients are more vulnerable to respiratory depression, ileus, urinary retention, constipation, sedation, falls, and delirium. Multimodal analgesia can reduce opioid exposure, but it should not become automatic polypharmacy. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may be inappropriate in patients with kidney disease, bleeding risk, heart failure, or high-risk gastrointestinal history. Gabapentinoids can increase sedation and dizziness and should be used selectively. Acetaminophen is often useful, but total daily dose and hepatic risk still matter.

Dexmedetomidine may reduce exposure to some sedatives and opioids, but it can cause bradycardia and hypotension. It should not be treated as a universal delirium-prevention drug. Anticholinergic exposure should be minimized when possible, especially in patients with cognitive impairment, constipation, urinary retention, glaucoma risk, or high delirium risk.

Pharmacists can add substantial value by reviewing chronic medications before surgery. High-yield targets include benzodiazepines, sedative-hypnotics, anticholinergics, opioids, skeletal muscle relaxants, antihypertensives that may worsen perioperative hypotension, diabetes medications requiring perioperative holds, anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, and renally cleared medications.

Table 3. Medication issues in frailty-informed anesthesia

Medication issue	Frailty-adjusted concern	Practical response
Propofol	Hypotension, apnea, delayed recovery	Lower initial dose, slow titration, avoid rapid bolus when possible
Midazolam	Prolonged sedation, delirium, falls	Avoid when nonessential; reduce dose if used
Opioids	Respiratory depression, ileus, constipation, delirium	Use multimodal analgesia thoughtfully; monitor ventilation and bowel function
Dexmedetomidine	Bradycardia and hypotension	Individualize dosing and monitor hemodynamics
Anticholinergics	Confusion, urinary retention, constipation	Reduce cumulative anticholinergic burden
NSAIDs	Kidney injury, bleeding, heart failure exacerbation	Avoid or limit in high-risk patients
Gabapentinoids	Sedation, dizziness, falls	Avoid reflexive use; dose-adjust for renal function
Chronic anticoagulants	Bleeding, neuraxial timing concerns	Follow perioperative anticoagulation and neuraxial safety guidance

Postoperative care and delirium prevention

Postoperative planning should begin before surgery. Frail patients may need closer monitoring, earlier mobilization, nutrition support, pulmonary hygiene, bowel regimens, medication simplification, and discharge planning. The goal is not only survival through the operation. The goal is recovery that fits the patient’s baseline function and priorities.

Delirium prevention is central. Multicomponent nonpharmacologic strategies remain the foundation. These include orientation, sleep preservation, glasses and hearing aids, hydration, early mobilization, pain control, constipation prevention, urinary retention management, avoidance of unnecessary lines and catheters, and medication review.

Delirium should be assessed when mental status changes occur. Hypoactive delirium is often missed because the patient may appear quiet, tired, or withdrawn rather than agitated. That matters. Missed delirium can delay treatment of pain, infection, hypoxia, medication toxicity, urinary retention, constipation, or metabolic disturbance.

ICU admission should not be based on frailty alone. Some frail patients benefit from higher-acuity monitoring. Others may be harmed by sleep disruption, immobility, noise, unfamiliar surroundings, and delirium triggers. The postoperative destination should reflect procedure risk, intraoperative course, physiologic reserve, treatment preferences, and the ability of the ward environment to provide appropriate care.

Ethical and operational considerations

Frailty assessment can reduce ageism when it prevents clinicians from using age as a crude proxy for risk. It can also create harm if used poorly. A frailty score should not be used to deny surgery automatically. It should support transparent discussion about risk, likely recovery, alternatives, and what matters most to the patient.

Institutions should define how frailty results are used. A useful program includes staff training, documentation standards, referral thresholds, pharmacist involvement, geriatric consultation pathways, delirium protocols, and quality metrics. Completion rates alone are not enough. Teams should also track whether screening leads to medication optimization, cognitive assessment, shared decision-making documentation, delirium prevention, mobility planning, and appropriate postoperative disposition.

References

1. American Geriatrics Society 2023 Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel. (2023). American Geriatrics Society 2023 updated AGS Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 71(7), 2052-2081. doi: 10.1111/jgs.18372
2. American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on Postoperative Delirium in Older Adults. (2015). American Geriatrics Society abstracted clinical practice guideline for postoperative delirium in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 63(1), 142-150. doi: 10.1111/jgs.13281
3. Centre for Perioperative Care & British Geriatrics Society. (2021). Guideline for perioperative care for people living with frailty undergoing elective and emergency surgery. Centre for Perioperative Care.
4. Fried, L. P., Tangen, C. M., Walston, J., Newman, A. B., Hirsch, C., Gottdiener, J., Seeman, T., Tracy, R., Kop, W. J., Burke, G., & McBurnie, M. A., for the Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. (2001). Frailty in older adults: Evidence for a phenotype. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, 56(3), M146-M156. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.M146
5. Gilbert, T., Neuburger, J., Kraindler, J., Keeble, E., Smith, P., Ariti, C., Arora, S., Street, A., Parker, S., Roberts, H. C., Bardsley, M., & Conroy, S. (2018). Development and validation of a Hospital Frailty Risk Score focusing on older people in acute care settings using electronic hospital records: An observational study. The Lancet, 391(10132), 1775-1782. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30668-8
6. 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. (2017). Development and initial validation of the Risk Analysis Index for measuring frailty in surgical populations. JAMA Surgery, 152(2), 175-182. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4202
7. Li, T., Li, J., Yuan, L., Wu, J., Jiang, C., Daniels, J., Mehta, R. L., Wang, M., Yeung, J., Jackson, T., Melody, T., Jin, S., Yao, Y., Wu, J., Chen, J., Smith, F. G., Lian, Q., & the RAGA Study Investigators. (2022). Effect of regional vs general anesthesia on incidence of postoperative delirium in older patients undergoing hip fracture surgery: The RAGA randomized trial. JAMA, 327(1), 50-58. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.22647
8. Lin, H. S., Watts, J. N., Peel, N. M., & Hubbard, R. E. (2016). Frailty and post-operative outcomes in older surgical patients: A systematic review. BMC Geriatrics, 16, 157. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0329-8
9. Makary, M. A., Segev, D. L., Pronovost, P. J., Syin, D., Bandeen-Roche, K., Patel, P., Takenaga, R., Devgan, L., Holzmueller, C. G., Tian, J., & Fried, L. P. (2010). Frailty as a predictor of surgical outcomes in older patients. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 210(6), 901-908. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.01.028
10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2023). Delirium: Prevention, diagnosis and management in hospital and long-term care (Clinical guideline CG103). Original guideline published 2010; last updated 2023.
11. Neuman, M. D., Feng, R., Carson, J. L., Gaskins, L. J., Dillane, D., Sessler, D. I., Sieber, F., Magaziner, J., Marcantonio, E. R., Mehta, S., Menio, D., Ayad, S., Stone, T., Papp, S., Schwenk, E. S., Elkassabany, N. M., Marshall, M., Jaffe, J. D., Luke, C., … Ellenberg, S. S., for the REGAIN Investigators. (2021). Spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia for hip surgery in older adults. The New England Journal of Medicine, 385(22), 2025-2035. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2113514
12. Partridge, J. S. L., Harari, D., Martin, F. C., & Dhesi, J. K. (2014). The impact of pre-operative comprehensive geriatric assessment on postoperative outcomes in older patients undergoing scheduled surgery: A systematic review. Anaesthesia, 69(Suppl. 1), 8-16. doi: 10.1111/anae.12494
13. Rockwood, K., Song, X., MacKnight, C., Bergman, H., Hogan, D. B., McDowell, I., & Mitnitski, A. (2005). A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 173(5), 489-495. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.050051
14. Rolfson, D. B., Majumdar, S. R., Tsuyuki, R. T., Tahir, A., & Rockwood, K. (2006). Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age and Ageing, 35(5), 526-529. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afl041
15. Sieber, F., McIsaac, D. I., Deiner, S., Azefor, T., Berger, M., Hughes, C., Leung, J. M., Maldon, J., McSwain, J. R., Neuman, M. D., Russell, M. M., Tang, V., Whitlock, E., Whittington, R., Marbella, A. M., Agarkar, M., Ramirez, S., Dyer, A., Friel Blanck, J., … Domino, K. B. (2025). 2025 American Society of Anesthesiologists Practice Advisory for Perioperative Care of Older Adults Scheduled for Inpatient Surgery. Anesthesiology, 142(1), 22-51. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000005172
16. U.S. National Library of Medicine. (n.d.-a). Dexmedetomidine injection, solution, concentrate: Prescribing information. DailyMed. Retrieved June 17, 2026.
17. U.S. National Library of Medicine. (n.d.-b). Fentanyl citrate injection, solution: Prescribing information. DailyMed. Retrieved June 17, 2026.
18. U.S. National Library of Medicine. (n.d.-c). Midazolam injection, solution: Prescribing information. DailyMed. Retrieved June 17, 2026.
19. U.S. National Library of Medicine. (n.d.-d). Propofol injection, emulsion: Prescribing information. DailyMed. Retrieved June 17, 2026.