Reproducibility and responsiveness of the Frailty Index and Frailty Phenotype in older hospitalized patients

被引:14
作者
Feenstra, Marlies [1 ,2 ]
Oud, Frederike M. M. [1 ,3 ]
Jansen, Carolien J. [1 ]
Smidt, Nynke [4 ]
van Munster, Barbara C. [1 ,3 ]
de Rooij, Sophia E. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Internal Med & Geriatr, POB 30001,HPC AA43, NL-9700 RB Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Med Spectrum Twente Hosp, Enschede, Netherlands
[3] Gelre Hosp, Dept Geriatr, Apeldoorn, Netherlands
[4] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Epidemiol, Groningen, Netherlands
关键词
Frail; Psychometric properties; Measurement properties; Reliability; Internal Medicine; Geriatric care; ADULTS; INTERVENTIONS; INSTRUMENTS; EXERCISE;
D O I
10.1186/s12877-021-02444-y
中图分类号
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要
Background There is growing interest for interventions aiming at preventing frailty progression or even to reverse frailty in older people, yet it is still unclear which frailty instrument is most appropriate for measuring change scores over time to determine the effectiveness of interventions. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine reproducibility and responsiveness properties of the Frailty Index (FI) and Frailty Phenotype (FP) in acutely hospitalized medical patients aged 70 years and older. Methods Reproducibility was assessed by Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC); Responsiveness was assessed by the standardized response mean (SRM), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results At baseline, 243 patients were included with a median age of 76 years (range 70-98). The analytic samples included 192 and 187 patients in the three and twelve months follow-up analyses, respectively. ICC of the FI were 0.85 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.76; 0.91) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.77; 0.90), and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.49; 0.77) and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65; 0.84) for the FP. SEM ranged from 5 to 13 %; SDC from 13 to 37 %. SRMs were good in patients with unchanged frailty status (< 0.50), and doubtful to good for deteriorated and improved patients (0.43-1.00). AUC's over three months were 0.77 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.86) and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.62; 0.79) for the FI, and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.58; 0.77) and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.55; 0.74) for the FP. Over twelve months, AUCs were 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.87) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73; 0.90) for the FI, and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.69; 0.87) and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.67; 0.84) for the FP. Conclusions The Frailty Index showed better reproducibility and responsiveness properties compared to the Frailty Phenotype among acutely hospitalized older patients.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] User's guide to correlation coefficients
    Akoglu, Haldun
    [J]. TURKISH JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2018, 18 (03): : 91 - 93
  • [2] Apostolo Joao, 2018, JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep, V16, P140, DOI 10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003382
  • [3] Apostolo Joao, 2017, JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep, V15, P1154, DOI 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-003018
  • [4] Response shift: a brief overview and proposed research priorities
    Barclay-Goddard, Ruth
    Epstein, Joshua D.
    Mayo, Nancy E.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2009, 18 (03) : 335 - 346
  • [5] Frailty assessment instruments: Systematic characterization of the uses and contexts of highly-cited instruments
    Buta, Brian J.
    Walston, Jeremy D.
    Godino, Job G.
    Park, Minsun
    Kalyani, Rita R.
    Xue, Qian-Li
    Bandeen-Roche, Karen
    Varadhan, Ravi
    [J]. AGEING RESEARCH REVIEWS, 2016, 26 : 53 - 61
  • [6] A NEW METHOD OF CLASSIFYING PROGNOSTIC CO-MORBIDITY IN LONGITUDINAL-STUDIES - DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION
    CHARLSON, ME
    POMPEI, P
    ALES, KL
    MACKENZIE, CR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1987, 40 (05): : 373 - 383
  • [7] Frailty in elderly people
    Clegg, Andrew
    Young, John
    Iliffe, Steve
    Rikkert, Marcel Olde
    Rockwood, Kenneth
    [J]. LANCET, 2013, 381 (9868) : 752 - 762
  • [8] Cohen J., 1969, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA
  • [9] Reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures - Theoretical considerations illustrated by an empirical example
    de Vet, HCW
    Bouter, LM
    Bezemer, PD
    Beurskens, AJHM
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2001, 17 (04) : 479 - 487
  • [10] De Vet HCW, 2011, MEASUREMENT MED 1