Roman Romero-Ortuno1. 1. Department of Medical Gerontology, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. romeror@tcd.ie
Abstract
AIM: Frailty is an emerging concept in primary care, which potentially can provide healthcare commissioners with a clinical focus for targeting resources at an aging population. However, primary care practitioners need valid instruments that are easy to use. With that purpose in mind, we created a Frailty Instrument (FIt) for primary care based on the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). The aim of the present study was to compare the mortality prediction of the five-item SHARE-FIt with that of a 40-item Frailty Index (FIx) based on comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). METHODS: The participants were 15,578 women and 12,783 men from the first wave of SHARE. A correspondence analysis was used to assess the degree of agreement between phenotypic classifications. The ability of the continuous frailty measures (FIt score and FIx) to predict mortality (mean follow up of 2.4 years) was compared using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots and areas under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: In both sexes, there was significant correspondence between phenotypic categories. The two continuous measures performed equally well as mortality predictors (women: AUC-FIx = 0.79, 95% CI 0.75-0.82, P < 0.001; AUC-FIt = 0.77, 95% CI 0.73-0.81, P < 0.001; men: AUC-FIx = 0.77, 95% CI 0.74-0.79, P < 0.001; AUC-FIt = 0.76, 95% CI 0.74-0.79, P < 0.001). Their equivalent performance was confirmed by statistical comparisons of the AUC. CONCLUSIONS: SHARE-FIt is simpler and more usable, and predicts mortality similarly to a more complex FIx based on CGA.
AIM: Frailty is an emerging concept in primary care, which potentially can provide healthcare commissioners with a clinical focus for targeting resources at an aging population. However, primary care practitioners need valid instruments that are easy to use. With that purpose in mind, we created a Frailty Instrument (FIt) for primary care based on the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). The aim of the present study was to compare the mortality prediction of the five-item SHARE-FIt with that of a 40-item Frailty Index (FIx) based on comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). METHODS: The participants were 15,578 women and 12,783 men from the first wave of SHARE. A correspondence analysis was used to assess the degree of agreement between phenotypic classifications. The ability of the continuous frailty measures (FIt score and FIx) to predict mortality (mean follow up of 2.4 years) was compared using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots and areas under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: In both sexes, there was significant correspondence between phenotypic categories. The two continuous measures performed equally well as mortality predictors (women: AUC-FIx = 0.79, 95% CI 0.75-0.82, P < 0.001; AUC-FIt = 0.77, 95% CI 0.73-0.81, P < 0.001; men: AUC-FIx = 0.77, 95% CI 0.74-0.79, P < 0.001; AUC-FIt = 0.76, 95% CI 0.74-0.79, P < 0.001). Their equivalent performance was confirmed by statistical comparisons of the AUC. CONCLUSIONS: SHARE-FIt is simpler and more usable, and predicts mortality similarly to a more complex FIx based on CGA.
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: A Lucicesare; R E Hubbard; N Fallah; P Forti; S D Searle; A Mitnitski; G Ravaglia; K Rockwood Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Sandrah P Eckel; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Paulo H M Chaves; Linda P Fried; Thomas A Louis Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Alberto Pilotto; Franco Rengo; Niccolò Marchionni; Daniele Sancarlo; Andrea Fontana; Francesco Panza; Luigi Ferrucci Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-01-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: René Rizzoli; Jean-Yves Reginster; Jean-François Arnal; Ivan Bautmans; Charlotte Beaudart; Heike Bischoff-Ferrari; Emmanuel Biver; Steven Boonen; Maria-Luisa Brandi; Arkadi Chines; Cyrus Cooper; Sol Epstein; Roger A Fielding; Bret Goodpaster; John A Kanis; Jean-Marc Kaufman; Andrea Laslop; Vincenzo Malafarina; Leocadio Rodriguez Mañas; Bruce H Mitlak; Richard O Oreffo; Jean Petermans; Kieran Reid; Yves Rolland; Avan Aihie Sayer; Yannis Tsouderos; Marjolein Visser; Olivier Bruyère Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2013-07-05 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: B Wöstmann; M Seelbach; P Seelbach; A Podhorsky; G F Kolb; R G Bretzel; P Rehmann Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Alice E Kane; Aniko Huizer-Pajkos; John Mach; Sarah J Mitchell; Rafael de Cabo; David G Le Couteur; Susan E Howlett; Sarah N Hilmer Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: T E Dorner; E Luger; J Tschinderle; K V Stein; S Haider; A Kapan; C Lackinger; K E Schindler Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Jennifer L Sutton; Rebecca L Gould; Stephanie Daley; Mark C Coulson; Emma V Ward; Aine M Butler; Stephen P Nunn; Robert J Howard Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2016-02-29 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Diem Nguyen; Pauline Hautekiet; Finaba Berete; Elise Braekman; Rana Charafeddine; Stefaan Demarest; Sabine Drieskens; Lydia Gisle; Lize Hermans; Jean Tafforeau; Johan Van der Heyden Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2020-06-03