A Mitnitski1, N Fallah, M R H Rockwood, K Rockwood. 1. Department of the Community Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. Arnold.Mitnitski@dal.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cognitive decline is related to frailty. Frailty can be operationalized in different ways, which have an unknown impact on the estimation of risk. Here, we compared 3 frailty measures in relation to cognitive changes and mortality in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA). DESIGN: Prospective population-based study, with 5 year follow up. PARTICIPANTS/ SETTING: 2,305 subjects aged 70+ years. METHODS: For each participant, cognitive status was measured by the errors in the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) score. Three frailty measures were used: a Frailty Index based on the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (FI-CGA) evaluated from 47 potential deficits, a Clinical Frailty Score and the Fried frailty phenotype. Multivariate Poisson regression and multivariate logistic regression were used to examine the association between baseline cognitive errors and frailty and death, respectively, while controlling for possible confounders (age, sex, education, and baseline cognitive status). RESULTS: Changes in cognitive status were strongly associated with baseline cognition and frailty, however defined. In multivariate models adjusted for age, sex and education, each frailty measure was associated with cognitive decline and with mortality. The frailest people (from the highest FI-CGA tertile) rarely showed cognitive improvement or stabilization (1.5%, 95% CI=0.002%-2.8%) compared with non-frail people (from the lowest tertile of the FI-CGA), of whom 27.8% (95% CI=24.5%-31.1%) did not deteriorate. CONCLUSIONS: Frail elderly people have an increased risk of cognitive decline. All frailty measures allowed quantification of individual vulnerability and predict both cognitive changes and mortality.
OBJECTIVES:Cognitive decline is related to frailty. Frailty can be operationalized in different ways, which have an unknown impact on the estimation of risk. Here, we compared 3 frailty measures in relation to cognitive changes and mortality in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA). DESIGN: Prospective population-based study, with 5 year follow up. PARTICIPANTS/ SETTING: 2,305 subjects aged 70+ years. METHODS: For each participant, cognitive status was measured by the errors in the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) score. Three frailty measures were used: a Frailty Index based on the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (FI-CGA) evaluated from 47 potential deficits, a Clinical Frailty Score and the Fried frailty phenotype. Multivariate Poisson regression and multivariate logistic regression were used to examine the association between baseline cognitive errors and frailty and death, respectively, while controlling for possible confounders (age, sex, education, and baseline cognitive status). RESULTS: Changes in cognitive status were strongly associated with baseline cognition and frailty, however defined. In multivariate models adjusted for age, sex and education, each frailty measure was associated with cognitive decline and with mortality. The frailest people (from the highest FI-CGA tertile) rarely showed cognitive improvement or stabilization (1.5%, 95% CI=0.002%-2.8%) compared with non-frail people (from the lowest tertile of the FI-CGA), of whom 27.8% (95% CI=24.5%-31.1%) did not deteriorate. CONCLUSIONS: Frail elderly people have an increased risk of cognitive decline. All frailty measures allowed quantification of individual vulnerability and predict both cognitive changes and mortality.
Authors: Tatyana G Jones; John A Schinka; Rodney D Vanderploeg; Brent J Small; Amy Borenstein Graves; James A Mortimer Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: L P Fried; C M Tangen; J Walston; A B Newman; C Hirsch; J Gottdiener; T Seeman; R Tracy; W J Kop; G Burke; M A McBurnie Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Gabor Abellan van Kan; Yves Rolland; Mathieu Houles; Sophie Gillette-Guyonnet; Maria Soto; Bruno Vellas Journal: Clin Geriatr Med Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.076
Authors: Patricia A Boyle; Aron S Buchman; Robert S Wilson; Sue E Leurgans; David A Bennett Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2010-01-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Hélène Amieva; Mélanie Le Goff; Xavier Millet; Jean Marc Orgogozo; Karine Pérès; Pascale Barberger-Gateau; Hélène Jacqmin-Gadda; Jean François Dartigues Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: John E Morley; John C Morris; Marla Berg-Weger; Soo Borson; Brian D Carpenter; Natalia Del Campo; Bruno Dubois; Keith Fargo; L Jaime Fitten; Joseph H Flaherty; Mary Ganguli; George T Grossberg; Theodore K Malmstrom; Ronald D Petersen; Carroll Rodriguez; Andrew J Saykin; Philip Scheltens; Eric G Tangalos; Joe Verghese; Gordon Wilcock; Bengt Winblad; Jean Woo; Bruno Vellas Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Qian-Li Xue; Jing Tian; Jeremy D Walston; Paulo H M Chaves; Anne B Newman; Karen Bandeen-Roche Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-01-20 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Mara A McAdams-DeMarco; Jingwen Tan; Megan L Salter; Alden Gross; Lucy A Meoni; Bernard G Jaar; Wen-Hong Linda Kao; Rulan S Parekh; Dorry L Segev; Stephen M Sozio Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-11-16 Impact factor: 8.237