BACKGROUND: Frailty is often associated with multimorbidity and disability. OBJECTIVES: We investigated heterogeneity in the frail older population by characterizing five subpopulations according to quantitative biological markers, multimorbidity and disability, and examined their association with mortality and nursing home admission. DESIGN: Observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (n=4,414) were from the population-based Age Gene/Environment Susceptibility Reykjavik Study. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty was defined by ≥ 3 of five characteristics: weight loss, weakness, reduced energy levels, slowness and physical inactivity. Multimorbidity was assessed using a simple disease count, based on 13 prevalent conditions. Disability was assessed by five activities of daily living; participants who had difficulty with one or more tasks were considered disabled. Differences among frail subpopulations were based on the co-presence of multimorbidity and disability. Differences among the following subpopulations were examined: 1) Non-frail (reference group); 2) Frail only; 3) Frail with disability; 4) Frailty with multimorbidity; 5) Frail with disability and multimorbidity. RESULTS: Frailty was present in 10.7% (n=473). Frailty was associated with increased risk for mortality (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.15-1.69) and nursing home admission (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.16-1.93); risks differed by subpopulations. Compared to the non-frail, the frail only group had poorer cognition and increased inflammation levels but did not have increased risk for mortality (OR 1.40; 95% CI 0.84-2.33) or nursing home admission (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.46-2.21). Compared to the non-frail, the other frail subpopulations had significantly poorer cognition, increased inflammation levels, more white matter lesions, higher levels of calcium, glucose and red cell distribution width and increased risk for mortality and nursing home admission. CONCLUSIONS: The adverse health risks associated with frailty in the general older adult population may primarily be driven by increased disease burden and disability.
DOCUMENT
Abstract: Disability is associated with lower quality of life and premature death in older people. Therefore, prevention and intervention targeting older people living with a disability is important. Frailty can be considered a major predictor of disability. In this study, we aimed to develop nomograms with items of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) as predictors by using cross-sectional and longitudinal data (follow-up of five and nine years), focusing on the prediction of total disability, disability in activities of daily living (ADL), and disability in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). At baseline, 479 Dutch community-dwelling people aged 75 years participated. They completed a questionnaire that included the TFI and the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale to assess the three disability variables. We showed that the TFI items scored different points, especially over time. Therefore, not every item was equally important in predicting disability. ‘Difficulty in walking’ and ‘unexplained weight loss’ appeared to be important predictors of disability. Healthcare professionals need to focus on these two items to prevent disability. We also conclude that the points given to frailty items differed between total, ADL, and IADL disability and also differed regarding years of follow-up. Creating one monogram that does justice to this seems impossible.
DOCUMENT
Background: Over the years, a plethora of frailty assessment tools has been developed. These instruments can be basically grouped into two types of conceptualizations – unidimensional, based on the physical–biological dimension – and multidimensional, based on the connections among the physical, psychological, and social domains. At present, studies on the comparison between uni- and multidimensional frailty measures are limited. Objective: The aims of this paper were: 1) to compare the prevalence of frailty obtained using a uni- and a multidimensional measure; 2) to analyze differences in the functional status among individuals captured as frail or robust by the two measures; and 3) to investigate relations between the two frailty measures and disability.
DOCUMENT
