Zoekresultaten
Volg ons op
Volg ons op
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
Objective: To predict mortality with the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) in a sample of community-dwelling older people, using a follow-up of 7 years. Setting and Participants: 479 Dutch community-dwelling people aged 75 years or older. Measurements: The TFI, a self-report questionnaire, was used to collect data about total, physical, psychological, and social frailty. The municipality of Roosendaal (a town in the Netherlands) provided the mortality dates. Conclusions and Implications: This study has shown the predictive validity of the TFI for mortality in community-dwelling older people. Our study demonstrated that physical and psychological frailty predicted mortality. Of the individual TFI components, difficulty in walking consistently predicted mortality. For identifying frailty, using the integral instrument is recommended because total, physical, psychological, and social frailty and its components have proven their value in predicting adverse outcomes of frailty, for example, increase in health care use and a lower quality of life.
MULTIFILE
Objective: The Tilburg Frailty Instrument (TFI) is an instrument for assessing frailty in community-dwelling older people. Since its development, many studies have been carried out examining the psychometric properties. The aim of this study was to provide a review of the main findings with regard to the reliability and validity of the TFI. Methods: We conducted a literature search in the PubMed and CINAHL databases on May 30, 2020. An inclusion criterion was the use of the entire TFI, part B, referring to the 15 components. No restrictions were placed on language or year of publication. Results: In total, 27 studies reported about the psychometric properties of the TFI. By far, most of the studies (n = 25) were focused on community-dwelling older people. Many studies showed that the internal consistency and test–retest reliability are good, which also applies for the criterion and construct validity. In many studies, adverse outcomes of interest were disability, increased health-care utilization, lower quality of life, and mortality. Regarding disability, studies predominantly show results that are excellent, with an area under the curve (AUC) >0.80. In addition, the TFI showed good associations with lower quality of life and the findings concerning mortality were at least acceptable. However, the association of the TFI with some indicators of health-care utilization can be indicated as poor (eg, visits to a general practitioner, hospitalization). Conclusion: Since population aging is occurring all over the world, it is important that the TFI is available and well known that it is a user-friendly instrument for assessing frailty and its psychometric properties being qualified as good. The findings of this assessment can support health-care professionals in selecting interventions to reduce frailty and delay its adverse outcomes, such as disability and lower quality of life.
DOCUMENT
Objective: The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is a self-report user-friendly questionnaire for assessing multidimensional frailty among community-dwelling older people. The main aim of this study is to re-evaluate the validity of the TFI, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, focusing on the predictive value of the total TFI and its physical, psychological, and social domains for adverse outcomes disability, indicators of healthcare utilization, and falls. Methods: The validity of the TFI was determined in a sample of 180 Dutch communitydwelling older people aged 70 years and older. The participants completed questionnaires including the TFI, the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) for assessing disability, and questions with regard to health care utilization and falls in 2016 and again one year later. Results: The physical and psychological domains of the TFI were significantly correlated as expected with adverse outcomes disability, many indicators of healthcare utilization, and falls. Regression analyses showed that physical frailty was mostly responsible for the effect of frailty on the adverse outcomes. The cross-sectional and longitudinal predictive validity of total frailty with respect to disability and receiving personal care was excellent, evidenced by Areas Under the Curves (AUCs) >0.8. In most cases, using the cut-off point 5 for total frailty ensured the best values for sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: The present study provided new, additional evidence for the validity of the TFI for assessing frailty in Dutch community-dwelling older people aiming to prevent or delay adverse outcomes, including disability.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Due to the rapidly increasing number of older people worldwide, the prevalence of frailty among older adults is expected to escalate in coming decades. It is crucial to recognize early onset symptoms to initiate specific preventive care. Therefore, early detection of frailty with appropriate screening instruments is needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the underlying dimensionality of the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), a widely used self-report screening instrument for identifying frail older adults. In addition, criterion validity of GFI subscales was examined and composition of GFI scores was evaluated.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was used to evaluate the structural validity, internal consistency and criterion validity of the GFI questionnaire in older adults aged 65 years and older. All subjects completed the GFI questionnaire (n = 1508). To assess criterion validity, a smaller sample of 119 older adults completed additional questionnaires: De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale, Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, RAND-36 physical functioning, and perceived general health item of the EuroQol-5D. Exploratory factor analysis and Mokken scale analysis were used to evaluate the structural validity of the GFI. A Venn diagram was constructed to show the composition of GFI subscale scores for frail subjects.
RESULTS: The factor structure of the GFI supported a three-dimensional structure of the scale. The subscales Daily Activities and Psychosocial Functioning showed good internal consistency, scalability, and criterion validity (Daily Activities: Cronbach's α = 0.81, Hs = .84, r = -.62; Psychosocial Functioning: Cronbach's α = 0.80, Hs = .35, r = -.48). The subscale Health Problems showed less strong internal consistency but acceptable scalability and criterion validity (Cronbach's α = .57, Hs = .35, r = -.48). The present data suggest that 90% of the frail older adults experience problems in the Psychosocial Functioning domain.
CONCLUSIONS: The present findings support a three-dimensional factor structure of the GFI, suggesting that a multidimensional assessment of frailty with the GFI is possible. These GFI subscale scores produce a richer assessment of frailty than with a single overall sum GFI score, and likely their use will contribute to more directed and customized care for older adults.
DOCUMENT
The aim of this study was to assess the predictive ability of the frailty phenotype (FP), Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) and frailty index (FI) for the outcomes mortality, hospitalization and increase in dependency in (instrumental) activities of daily living ((I)ADL) among older persons. This prospective cohort study with 2-year follow-up included 2420 Dutch community-dwelling older people (65+, mean age 76.3±6.6 years, 39.5% male) who were pre-frail or frail according to the FP. Mortality data were obtained from Statistics Netherlands. All other data were self-reported. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was calculated for each frailty instrument and outcome measure. The prevalence of frailty, sensitivity and specifcity were calculated using cutoff values proposed by the developers and cutoff values one above and one below the proposed ones (0.05 for FI). All frailty instruments poorly predicted mortality, hospitalization and (I)ADL dependency (AUCs between 0.62–0.65, 0.59–0.63 and 0.60–0.64, respectively). Prevalence estimates of frailty in this population varied between 22.2% (FP) and 64.8% (TFI). The FP and FI showed higher levels of specifcity, whereas sensitivity was higher for the GFI and TFI. Using a different cutoff point considerably changed the prevalence, sensitivity and specifcity. In conclusion, the predictive ability of the FP, GFI, TFI and FI was poor for all outcomes in a population of pre-frail and frail community-dwelling older people. The FP and the FI showed higher values of specifcity, whereas sensitivity was higher for the GFI and TFI.
DOCUMENT
Background: The population ageing in most Western countries leads to a larger number of frail older people. These frail people are at an increased risk of negative health outcomes, such as functional decline, falls, institutionalisation and mortality. Many approaches are available for identifying frailty among older people. Researchers most often use Fried and colleagues’ description of the frailty phenotype. The authors describe five physical criteria. Other researchers prefer a combination of measurements in the social, psychological and/or physical domains. The aim of this study is to describe the levels of social, psychological and physical functioning according to Fried’s frailty stages using a large cohort of Dutch community-dwelling older people. Methods: There were 8,684 community-dwelling older people (65+) who participated in this cross-sectional study. Based on the five Fried frailty criteria (weight loss, exhaustion, low physical activity, slowness, weakness), the participants were divided into three stages: non-frail (score 0), pre-frail (score 1–2) and frail (score 3–5). These stages were related to scores in the social (social network type, informal care use, loneliness), psychological (psychological distress, mastery, self-management) and physical (chronic diseases, GARS IADL-disability, OECD disability) domains. Results: 63.2 % of the participants was non-frail, 28.1 % pre-frail and 8.7 % frail. When comparing the three stages of frailty, frail people appeared to be older, were more likely to be female, were more often unmarried or living alone, and had a lower level of education compared to their pre-frail and non-frail counterparts. The difference between the scores in the social, psychological and physical domains were statistically significant between the three frailty stages. The most preferable scores came from the non-frail group, and least preferable scores were from the frail group. For example use of informal care: non-frail 3.9 %, pre-frail 23.8 %, frail 60.6 %, and GARS IADL-disability mean scores: non-frail 9.2, pre-frail 13.0, frail 19.7. Conclusion: When older people were categorised according to the three frailty stages, as described by Fried and colleagues, there were statistically significant differences in the level of social, psychological and physical functioning between the non-frail, pre-frail and frail persons. Non-frail participants had consistently more preferable scores compared to the frail participants. This indicated that the Fried frailty criteria could help healthcare professionals identify and treat frail older people in an efficient way, and provide indications for problems in other domains.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with COVID-19 severity in clinical settings. No general population-based studies on the association between actual frailty status and COVID-19 hospitalization are available.
AIMS: To investigate the association between frailty and the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization once infected.
METHODS: 440 older adults who participated in the Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort study in the Northern Netherlands and reported positive COVID-19 testing results (54.2% women, age 70 ± 4 years in 2021) were included in the analyses. COVID-19 hospitalization status was self-reported. The Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) was derived from 15 self-reported questionnaire items related to daily activities, health problems, and psychosocial functioning, with a score ≥ 4 indicating frailty. Both frailty and COVID-19 hospitalization were assessed in the same period. Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used to analyze the associations between frailty and COVID-19 hospitalization.
RESULTS: Of 440 older adults included, 42 were hospitalized because of COVID-19 infection. After adjusting for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, a higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization was observed for frail individuals (risk ratio (RR) [95% CI] 1.97 [1.06-3.67]) compared to those classified as non-frail.
DISCUSSION: Frailty was positively associated with COVID-19 hospitalization once infected, independent of sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. Future research on frailty and COVID-19 should consider biomarkers of aging and frailty to understand the pathophysiological mechanisms and manifestations between frailty and COVID-19 outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was positively associated with the risk of hospitalization among older adults that were infected with COVID-19. Public health strategies for frailty prevention in older adults need to be advocated, as it is helpful to reduce the burden of the healthcare system, particularly during a pandemic like COVID-19.
DOCUMENT
Background: Dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) might be caused by multidimensional frailty. Prevention is important as ADL dependency might threaten the ability to age in place. Therefore, this study aimed to assess whether protective factors, derived from a systematic literature review, moderate the relationship between multidimensional frailty and ADL dependency, and whether this differs across age groups. Methods: A longitudinal study with a follow–up after 24 months was conducted among 1027 communitydwelling people aged ≥65 years. Multidimensional frailty was measured with the Tilburg Frailty Indicator, and ADL dependency with the ADL subscale from the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. Other measures included socio-demographic characteristics and seven protective factors against ADL dependency, such as physical activity and non-smoking. Logistic regression analyses with interaction terms were conducted. Results: Frail older people had a twofold risk of developing ADL dependency after 24 months in comparison to non-frail older people (OR=2.12, 95% CI=1.45–3.00). The selected protective factors against ADL dependency did not significantly moderate this relationship. Nonetheless, higher levels of physical activity decreased the risk of becoming ADL dependent (OR=0.67, 95% CI=0.46–0.98), as well as having sufficient financial resources (OR=0.49, 95% CI=0.35–0.71). Conclusion: Multidimensional frail older people have a higher risk of developing ADL dependency. The studied protective factors against ADL dependency did not significantly moderate this relationship.
DOCUMENT
Restrictive measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic may cause problems in the physical, social, and psychological functioning of older people, resulting in increased frailty. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to assess the prevalence and characteristics of frailty, to examine differences in perceived COVID-19-related concerns and threats between frail and non-frail people and to identify variables associated with frailty in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Dutch older people aged ≥ 65 years. We used data from the Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort Study. The Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) was used, with a score ≥ 4 indicating frailty. Frailty was described per domain (i.e., physical, cognitive, social, and psychological). The association between demographic, health and lifestyle variables and frailty was determined with logistic regression analyses. Frailty was present in 13% of the 11,145 participants that completed the GFI. Most items contributing to a positive frailty score were found within the social domain, in the frail (51%) and the non-frail (59%) persons. For items related to concerns and threats, a significantly higher proportion of frail people reported being worried or feeling threatened. In conclusion, during Corona restrictions, prevalence of frailty was considerable in older people from the Northern Netherlands, with one in eight being frail. Frailty was characterized by social problems and frail people were more often worried and felt threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic.
DOCUMENT
