A scoping review of the Clinical Frailty Scale.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Frailty is increasingly recognized as an important construct which has health implications for older adults. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a judgement-based frailty tool that evaluates specific domains including comorbidity, function, and cognition to generate a frailty score ranging from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill). The aim of this scoping review is to identify and document the nature and extent of research evidence related to the CFS.Methods
We performed a comprehensive literature search to identify original studies that used the Clinical Frailty Scale. Medline OVID, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from January 2005 to March 2017. Articles were screened by two independent reviewers. Data extracted included publication date, setting, demographics, purpose of CFS assessment, and outcomes associated with CFS score.Results
Our search yielded 1688 articles of which 183 studies were included. Overall, 62% of studies were conducted after 2015 and 63% of the studies measured the CFS in hospitalized patients. The association of the CFS with an outcome was examined 526 times; CFS was predictive in 74% of the cases. Mortality was the most common outcome examined with CFS being predictive 87% of the time. CFS was associated with comorbidity 73% of the time, complications 100%, length of stay 75%, falls 71%, cognition 94%, and function 91%. The CFS was associated with other frailty scores 94% of the time.Conclusions
This scoping review revealed that the CFS has been widely used in multiple settings. The association of CFS score with clinical outcomes highlights its utility in the care of the aging population.
SUBMITTER: Church S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7540438 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Frailty and dementia appear to be closely linked, although mechanisms remain unclear. The objective was to conduct a scoping review of the association between frailty and Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers in humans.Three databases, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase, were searched for articles using the following search terms: "frail elderly", "Alzheimer's disease", "dementia biomarkers" and their synonyms. Inclusion was limited to original research in humans published before 2017, which included a frailty measure and AD biomarker (fluid markers, neuroimaging, and neuropathology).Five hundred twenty-two articles were identified and screened; 10 were included. Most were cross-sectional (n = 6), measured the frailty phenotype (n = 6), and included people with dementia (n = 7). Biomarkers examined were postmortem AD pathology (n = 3), brain atrophy (n = 5), and in vivo fluid markers (n = 2). Eight studies reported that increased frailty was associated with at least one biomarker abnormality.Evidence is limited and suffers from design limitations but suggests that frailty and AD biomarkers are closely linked. Longitudinal research examining multiple biomarkers and frailty is warranted.
| S-EPMC6072899 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: Indigenous populations experience high rates of age-related illness when compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts. Frailty is a challenging expression of aging and an important public health priority. The purpose of this review was to map what the existing literature reports around frailty in Indigenous populations and to highlight the current gaps in frailty research within the Indigenous landscape. Method: Scoping review of English language original research articles focusing on frailty within Indigenous adult populations in settler colonial countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and USA). Ten electronic databases and eight relevant institutional websites were searched from inception to October 2020. Results: Nine articles met our inclusion criteria, finding this population having a higher prevalence of frailty and frailty occurring at younger ages when compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts, but two did not use a formal frailty tool. Females presented with higher levels of frailty. No culturally specific frailty tool was identified, and the included articles did not assess strategies or interventions to manage or prevent frailty in Indigenous peoples. Conclusions: There was little definitive evidence of the true frailty prevalence, approaches to frailty screening and of potential points of intervention to manage or prevent the onset of frailty. Improvements in the quality of evidence are urgently needed, along with further research to determine the factors contributing to higher rates of frailty within Indigenous populations. Incorporation of Indigenous views of frailty, and instruments and programs that are led and designed by Indigenous communities, are crucial to address this public health priority.
| S-EPMC8646043 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Older people have paid a huge toll in terms of mortality during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Frailty may have contributed to the vulnerability of older people to more severe clinical presentation. We aimed at reviewing available evidence about frailty and COVID-19. We searched PUBMED, Web of Science, and EMBASE from 1 December 2019 to 29 May 2020. Study selection and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. Qualitative synthesis was conducted and quantitative data extracted when available. Forty papers were included: 13 editorials, 15 recommendations/guidelines, 3 reviews, 1 clinical trial, 6 observational studies, 2 case reports. Editorials and reviews underlined the potential clinical relevance of assessing frailty among older patients with COVID-19. However, frailty was only investigated in regards to its association with overall mortality, hospital contagion, intensive care unit admission rates, and disease phenotypes in the few observational studies retrieved. Specific interventions in relation to frailty or its impact on COVID-19 treatments have not been evaluated yet. Even with such limited evidence, clinical recommendations on the use of frailty tools have been proposed to support decision making about escalation plan. Ongoing initiatives are expected to improve knowledge of COVID-19 interaction with frailty and to promote patient-centered approaches.
| S-EPMC7408623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesFrailty is associated with poor outcomes for patients on dialysis; however, previous studies have not taken into account the severity of frailty as a predictor of outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess if there was an association between the degree of frailty and mortality among patients on incident dialysis.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsA cohort study of incident chronic dialysis patients was conducted between January of 2009 and June of 2013 (last follow-up in December of 2013). On the basis of overall clinical impression, the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) score was determined for patients at the start of dialysis by their primary nephrologist. This simple scale allocates a single point to different states of frailty (1, very fit; 2, well; 3, managing well; 4, vulnerable; 5, mildly frail; 6, moderately frail; 7, severely frail or terminally ill) with an emphasis on function of the assessed individual. The primary outcome was time to death. Patients were censored at the time of transplantation.ResultsThe cohort consisted of 390 patients with completed CFS scores (mean age of 63±15 years old). Most were Caucasian (89%) and men (67%), and 30% of patients had ESRD caused by diabetic nephropathy. The median Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 4 (interquartile range =3-6), and the median CFS score was 4 (interquartile range =2-5). There were 96 deaths over 750 patient-years at risk. In an adjusted Cox survival analysis, the hazard ratio associated with each 1-point increase in the CFS was 1.22 (95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 1.43; P=0.02).ConclusionsA higher severity of frailty (as defined by the CFS) at dialysis initiation is associated with higher mortality.
| S-EPMC4422241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIdentification of frailty is crucial to guide patient care for the elderly. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a reliable, synthesis and clinical judgment-based tool. However, a validated Chinese version of CFS (CFS-C) is lacking. The aim of this study is to describe the translation process of CFS into traditional Chinese and to evaluate its reliability and validity in a geriatric study population in Taiwan.MethodsThis cross-sectional study recruited 221 geriatric outpatients aged 65 years or older at a medical center in Taipei, Taiwan. The Chinese version of CFS was produced following Brislin's translation model. Weighted kappa for agreement and Kendall's tau for correlation were used to assess inter-rater reliability (a subgroup of 52 outpatients) between geriatricians and one research assistant, and validity tests (221 outpatients) by comparing CFS-C with Fried frailty phenotype and Frailty Index based on Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (FI-CGA). Correlation between CFS-C and other geriatric conditions were also assessed.ResultsThe inter-rater reliability revealed moderate agreement (weighted kappa = 0.60) and strong correlation (Kendall's tau = 0.67). For criterion validity, CFS-C categorisation showed fair agreement (weighted kappa = 0.37) and significant correlation (Kendall's tau = 0.46) with Fried frailty phenotype, and higher agreement (weighted kappa = 0.51) and correlation (Kendall's tau = 0.63) with FI-CGA categorisation. CFS-C was significantly correlated with various geriatric assessments, including functional disability, physical performance, hand grip, comorbidity, cognition, depression, and nutrition status. No significant correlation was found between CFS-C and appendicular muscle mass.ConclusionsThe CFS-C demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability in Chinese older adults in Taiwan. Development of CFS-C enhanced consistency and accuracy of frailty assessment, both in research and clinical practice.
| S-EPMC9298166 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a well-established tool that has been widely employed to assess patients' frailty status and to predict clinical outcomes in the acute phase of a disease, but more information is needed to define the implications that this tool have when dealing with Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs).MethodsAn electronic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases to identify studies employing the CFS to assess frailty in patients with NCDs.FindingsAfter database searching, article suitability evaluation, and studies' quality assessment, 43 studies were included in the systematic review. Researches were conducted mostly in Japan (37.5%), and half of the studies were focused on cardiovascular diseases (46.42%), followed by cancer (25.00%), and diabetes (10.71%). Simplicity (39.29%), efficacy (37.5%), and rapidity (16.07%) were the CFS characteristics mostly appreciated by the authors of the studies. The CFS-related results indicated that its scores were associated with patients' clinical outcomes (33.92%), with the presence of the disease (12.5%) and, with clinical decision making (10.71%). Furthermore, CFS resulted as a predictor of life expectancy in 23 studies (41.07%), clinical outcomes in 12 studies (21.43%), and hospital admissions/readmissions in 6 studies (10.71%).DiscussionCFS was found to be a well-established and useful tool to assess frailty in NCDs, too. It resulted to be related to the most important disease-related clinical characteristics and, thus, it should be always considered as an important step in the multidisciplinary evaluation of frail and chronic patients.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp? PROSPERO 2021, ID: CRD42021224214.
| S-EPMC9425100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThere is currently no gold standard in evaluating frailty in patients with heart failure (HF), and the prognostic value of frailty according to the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) on mortality in patients with HF is still unknown.Methods and resultsAmong consecutive 596 patients after their discharge from HF in Kokura Memorial Hospital (Kitakyushu, Japan) during 2015, their frailty at discharge was assessed according to CFS. Patients were classified into three groups: low (N = 232, 38.9%), intermediate (N = 230, 38.6%), and high (N = 134, 22.5%). The primary endpoint was defined as 2 year all-cause death. The mean age was 76.6 ± 10.1 years, and 55.3% were men in entire cohort. There were significant differences in age, living environment, and dementia among low, intermediate, and high CFS groups. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and co-morbidities such as severe renal failure and severe anaemia tended to increase with frailty severity, while body mass index (BMI) and albumin level tended to decrease with frailty severity. Two year cumulative incidences of all-cause death for the three groups were 12.8%, 25.4%, and 52.7% (P < 0.001), respectively. This significant difference in the risk for all-cause death among the CFS groups was driven by the risk for cardiac (8.6%, 14.2%, and 31.0%, respectively, P < 0.001) and non-cardiac death (4.6%, 13.0%, and 31.4%, respectively, P < 0.001). The multivariate analysis showed that high frailty was independently associated with all-cause death (intermediate CFS group: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.43, 95% confidence interval, 0.86-2.36, P = 0.16; high CFS group: adjusted hazard ratio, 3.90, 95% confidence interval, 2.32-6.55, P < 0.001), and this result was consistent, irrespective of stratification based on age, sex, BMI, and LVEF without significant interaction.ConclusionsThe simple CFS tool was successful in predicting the risk for all-cause death in patients with HF, and frailty according to CFS was independently associated with all-cause death irrespective of stratification based on age, sex, BMI, and LVEF without significant interaction. The CFS is a valuable prognostic tool in clinical settings.
| S-EPMC8006666 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Different scales are being used to measure frailty. This study examined the convergent validity of the electronic Frailty Index (eFI) with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Method: The cross-sectional study recruited patients from three regional community nursing teams in the South East of England. The CFS was rated at recruitment, and the eFI was extracted from electronic health records (EHRs). A McNemar test of paired data was used to compare discordant pairs between the eFI and the CFS, and an exact McNemar Odds Ratio (OR) was calculated. Findings: Of 265 eligible patients consented, 150 (57%) were female, with a mean age of 85.6 years (SD = 7.8), and 78% were 80 years and older. Using the CFS, 68% were estimated to be moderate to severely frail, compared to 91% using the eFI. The eFI recorded a greater degree of frailty than the CFS (OR = 5.43, 95%CI 3.05 to 10.40; p < 0.001). This increased to 7.8 times more likely in men, and 9.5 times in those aged over 80 years. Conclusions: This study found that the eFI overestimates the frailty status of community dwelling older people. Overestimating frailty may impact on the demand of resources required for further management and treatment of those identified as being frail.
| S-EPMC7709678 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFrailty is associated with an increased risk of death and morbid events. Frail individuals are known to have multiple comorbidities which are often associated with polypharmacy. Whilst a relationship between polypharmacy and frailty has been demonstrated, it is not clear if there is an independent relationship between frailty and medication harm.AimsThis scoping review aimed to identify and critically appraise studies evaluating medication harm in patients with frailty.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched from inception until 1 February 2021 using key search terms that are synonymous with frailty (such as frail and frail elderly) and medication harm (such as adverse drug events and adverse drug reactions). To be included, studies must have identified medication harm as a primary or secondary outcome measure, and used a frailty assessment tool to determine frailty, or clearly defined how frailty was assessed. Data were narratively synthesised and presented in tables. The checklist from the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute was used to assess the quality and risk of bias of studies that met the inclusion criteria.ResultsOf 2685 retrieved abstracts, 24 underwent full-text review and nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies were retrospective cohort studies, and six were prospective observational studies. Six studies comprised two distinct groups of frail and non-frail individuals, and the remaining three studies evaluated medication harm in an entirely frail population. Seven studies used validated frailty tools such as the Clinical Frailty Scale, Fried Frailty Index, and Fried Frailty Phenotype. Two studies measured frailty using self-defined criteria. Overall, frail individuals were at risk of medication harm with rates ranging between 18.7 and 77% across the nine studies. However, whether frailty is an independent predictor of medication harm remains uncertain, as this was only evaluated in one study. The risk of bias assessment identified limitations in methods and reporting with all nine studies.ConclusionThis scoping review identified nine studies evaluating medication harm in frail patients. However, all were limited by the methodological quality and inadequate reporting of study factors. There are few high-quality studies that described a relationship between medication harm and frailty. More robust studies are required that examine the independent relationship between frailty and medication harm, after adjusting for all possible confounders and in particular polypharmacy.
| S-EPMC9135775 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo assess the prevalence of frailty by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the 5-item FRAIL scale and their association with hospitalization in hemodialysis (HD) patients.MethodsThis was a prospective observational study. We included patients of both genders ≥ 18 years old in HD treatment for at least 3 months. Demographic, clinical, and routine laboratory data were retrieved from the medical charts. Two different frailty assessment tools were used, the CFS and the FRAIL scale. Participants were followed up for 9 months and hospitalizations for all causes were evaluated. A Venn diagram was constructed to show the overlap of possible frailty and pre-frailty. Cox regression was used to identify the association between frailty and hospitalization. The significance level was 5%.ResultsA total of 137 subjects were included in the analysis. The median age was 61 (52-67) years and 60% were male. The hospitalization rate and mortality in 9 months were 22.6% and 7.29%, respectively. Regarding frailty, the overall prevalence was 13.8% assessed by CFS and 36.5% according to the FRAIL scale. In the Cox regression, frailty by FRAIL scale was associated with a 2.8-fold increase in the risk of hospitalization (OR = 2.880; 95% CI = 1.361-6.096; p = 0.006), but frailty assessed by the CFS was not associated with the need for hospitalization.ConclusionIn HD patients, the FRAIL scale proved to be an easy-to-apply tool, identifying a high prevalence of frailty and being a predictor of hospital admission.
| S-EPMC9773694 | biostudies-literature