Dataset Information

Measures of frailty in population-based studies: an overview.

ABSTRACT: Although research productivity in the field of frailty has risen exponentially in recent years, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the measurement of this syndrome. This overview offers three services: first, we provide a comprehensive catalogue of current frailty measures; second, we evaluate their reliability and validity; third, we report on their popularity of use.In order to identify relevant publications, we searched MEDLINE (from its inception in 1948 to May 2011); scrutinized the reference sections of the retrieved articles; and consulted our own files. An indicator of the frequency of use of each frailty instrument was based on the number of times it had been utilized by investigators other than the originators.Of the initially retrieved 2,166 papers, 27 original articles described separate frailty scales. The number (range: 1 to 38) and type of items (range of domains: physical functioning, disability, disease, sensory impairment, cognition, nutrition, mood, and social support) included in the frailty instruments varied widely. Reliability and validity had been examined in only 26% (7/27) of the instruments. The predictive validity of these scales for mortality varied: for instance, hazard ratios/odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for mortality risk for frail relative to non-frail people ranged from 1.21 (0.78; 1.87) to 6.03 (3.00; 12.08) for the Phenotype of Frailty and 1.57 (1.41; 1.74) to 10.53 (7.06; 15.70) for the Frailty Index. Among the 150 papers which we found to have used at least one of the 27 frailty instruments, 69% (n?=?104) reported on the Phenotype of Frailty, 12% (n?=?18) on the Frailty Index, and 19% (n?=?28) on one of the remaining 25 instruments.Although there are numerous frailty scales currently in use, reliability and validity have rarely been examined. The most evaluated and frequently used measure is the Phenotype of Frailty.

SUBMITTER: Bouillon K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3710231 | biostudies-other | 2013 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measures of frailty in population-based studies: an overview.

Bouillon Kim K Kivimaki Mika M Hamer Mark M Sabia Severine S Fransson Eleonor I EI Singh-Manoux Archana A Gale Catharine R CR Batty G David GD

BMC geriatrics 20130621

<h4>Background</h4>Although research productivity in the field of frailty has risen exponentially in recent years, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the measurement of this syndrome. This overview offers three services: first, we provide a comprehensive catalogue of current frailty measures; second, we evaluate their reliability and validity; third, we report on their popularity of use.<h4>Methods</h4>In order to identify relevant publications, we searched MEDLINE (from its inception i ...[more]

PMID: 23786540

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aging is often associated with a decline in physical function that eventually leads to loss of autonomy in activities of daily living (ADL). Walking is a very common ADL, important for main determinants of quality of life in older age, and it requires the integration of many physiological systems. Gait speed has been described as the 'sixth vital sign' because it is a core indicator of health and function in aging and disease. We reviewed original studies up to June 2020 that assessed frailty in both longitudinal and cross-sectional observational studies, paying particular attention to how gait is measured in older population and how the gait parameter adopted may influence the estimated frailty models and the health-related outcomes of the various studies (i.e. clinical, cognitive, physical, and nutritional outcomes). Eighty-five studies met the search strategy and were included in the present systematic review. According to the frailty tools, more than 60% of the studies used the physical phenotype model proposed by Fried and colleagues, while one-third referred to multi-domain indexes or models and only 5% referred to other single-domain frailty models (social or cognitive). The great heterogeneity observed in gait measurements and protocols limited the possibility to directly compare the results of the studies and it could represent an important issue causing variability in the different outcome measures in both clinical-and population-based settings. Gait appeared to be an indicator of health and function also in frail older adults, and different gait parameters appeared to predict adverse health-related outcomes in clinical, cognitive, and physical domains and, to a lesser extent, in nutritional domain. Gait has the potential to elucidate the common basic mechanisms of cognitive and motor decline. Advances in technology may extend the validity of gait in different clinical settings also in frail older adults, and technology-based assessment should be encouraged. Combining various gait parameters may enhance frailty prediction and classification of different frailty phenotypes.

Project description:Background In aortic valve disease, the relationship between claims-based frailty indices (CFIs) and validated measures of frailty constructed from in-person assessments is unclear but may be relevant for retrospective ascertainment of frailty status when otherwise unmeasured. Methods and Results We linked adults aged ≥65 years in the US CoreValve Studies (linkage rate, 67%; mean age, 82.7±6.2 years, 43.1% women), to Medicare inpatient claims, 2011 to 2015. The Johns Hopkins CFI, validated on the basis of the Fried index, was generated for each study participant, and the association between CFI tertile and trial outcomes was evaluated as part of the EXTEND-FRAILTY substudy. Among 2357 participants (64.9% frail), higher CFI tertile was associated with greater impairments in nutrition, disability, cognition, and self-rated health. The primary outcome of all-cause mortality at 1 year occurred in 19.3%, 23.1%, and 31.3% of those in tertiles 1 to 3, respectively (tertile 2 versus 1: hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.98-1.51; P=0.07; tertile 3 versus 1: hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.41-2.12; P<0.001). Secondary outcomes (bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, and hospitalization) were more frequent with increasing CFI tertile and persisted despite adjustment for age, sex, New York Heart Association class, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score. Conclusions In linked Medicare and CoreValve study data, a CFI based on the Fried index consistently identified individuals with worse impairments in frailty, disability, cognitive dysfunction, and nutrition and a higher risk of death, hospitalization, bleeding, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, independent of age and risk category. While not a surrogate for validated metrics of frailty using in-person assessments, use of this CFI to ascertain frailty status among patients with aortic valve disease may be valid and prognostically relevant information when otherwise not measured.

Dataset Information

Measures of frailty in population-based studies: an overview.

Publications

Measures of frailty in population-based studies: an overview.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets