BACKGROUND: Frailty, an important prognostic indicator in heart failure (HF), may be defined as a biological phenotype or an accumulation of deficits. Each method has strengths and limitations, but their utility has never been evaluated in the same community HF cohort. METHODS: Southeastern Minnesota residents with HF were recruited from 2007 to 2011. Frailty according to the biological phenotype was defined as 3 or more of: weak grip strength, physical exhaustion, slowness, low activity and unintentional weight loss >10 lb in 1 year. Intermediate frailty was defined as 1 to 2. The deficit index was defined as the proportion of deficits present out of 32 deficits. RESULTS: Among 223 patients (mean age 71 ± 14, 61% male), 21% were frail and 48% intermediate frail according to the biological phenotype. The deficit index ranged from 0.02-0.75, with a mean (SD) of 0.25 (0.13). Over a mean follow-up of 2.4 years, 63 patients died. After adjustment for age, sex and ejection fraction, patients categorized as frail by the biological phenotype had a 2-fold increased risk of death compared to those with no frailty, whereas a 0.1 unit increase in the deficit index was associated with a 44% increased risk of death. Both measures predicted death equally (C-statistics: 0.687 for biological phenotype and 0.700 for deficit index). CONCLUSION: The deficit index and the biological phenotype equally predict mortality. As the biological phenotype is not routinely assessed clinically, the deficit index, which can be ascertained from medical records, is a feasible alternative to ascertain frailty.
BACKGROUND: Frailty, an important prognostic indicator in heart failure (HF), may be defined as a biological phenotype or an accumulation of deficits. Each method has strengths and limitations, but their utility has never been evaluated in the same community HF cohort. METHODS: Southeastern Minnesota residents with HF were recruited from 2007 to 2011. Frailty according to the biological phenotype was defined as 3 or more of: weak grip strength, physical exhaustion, slowness, low activity and unintentional weight loss >10 lb in 1 year. Intermediate frailty was defined as 1 to 2. The deficit index was defined as the proportion of deficits present out of 32 deficits. RESULTS: Among 223 patients (mean age 71 ± 14, 61% male), 21% were frail and 48% intermediate frail according to the biological phenotype. The deficit index ranged from 0.02-0.75, with a mean (SD) of 0.25 (0.13). Over a mean follow-up of 2.4 years, 63 patients died. After adjustment for age, sex and ejection fraction, patients categorized as frail by the biological phenotype had a 2-fold increased risk of death compared to those with no frailty, whereas a 0.1 unit increase in the deficit index was associated with a 44% increased risk of death. Both measures predicted death equally (C-statistics: 0.687 for biological phenotype and 0.700 for deficit index). CONCLUSION: The deficit index and the biological phenotype equally predict mortality. As the biological phenotype is not routinely assessed clinically, the deficit index, which can be ascertained from medical records, is a feasible alternative to ascertain frailty.
Authors: Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas; Catherine Féart; Giovanni Mann; Jose Viña; Somnath Chatterji; Wojtek Chodzko-Zajko; Magali Gonzalez-Colaço Harmand; Howard Bergman; Laure Carcaillon; Caroline Nicholson; Angelo Scuteri; Alan Sinclair; Martha Pelaez; Tischa Van der Cammen; François Beland; Jerome Bickenbach; Paul Delamarche; Luigi Ferrucci; Linda P Fried; Luis Miguel Gutiérrez-Robledo; Kenneth Rockwood; Fernando Rodríguez Artalejo; Gaetano Serviddio; Enrique Vega Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2012-04-16 Impact factor: 6.053
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: Christopher M O'Connor; David J Whellan; Kerry L Lee; Steven J Keteyian; Lawton S Cooper; Stephen J Ellis; Eric S Leifer; William E Kraus; Dalane W Kitzman; James A Blumenthal; David S Rendall; Nancy Houston Miller; Jerome L Fleg; Kevin A Schulman; Robert S McKelvie; Faiez Zannad; Ileana L Piña Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-04-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ambarish Pandey; Dalane Kitzman; David J Whellan; Pamela W Duncan; Robert J Mentz; Amy M Pastva; M Benjamin Nelson; Bharathi Upadhya; Haiying Chen; Gordon R Reeves Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Motahareh Moghtadaei; Hailey J Jansen; Martin Mackasey; Sara A Rafferty; Oleg Bogachev; John L Sapp; Susan E Howlett; Robert A Rose Journal: J Physiol Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: David M Harmon; Kristen M Tecson; Aayla K Jamil; Joost Felius; Gonzalo V Gonzalez-Stawinski; Susan M Joseph; Shelley A Hall Journal: Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) Date: 2019-03-28
Authors: Shannon M Dunlay; Soon J Park; Lyle D Joyce; Richard C Daly; John M Stulak; Sheila M McNallan; Véronique L Roger; Sudhir S Kushwaha Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2013-12-27 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Sheila M Manemann; Alanna M Chamberlain; Cynthia M Boyd; Donna M Miller; Kimberly L Poe; Andrea Cheville; Susan A Weston; Ellen E Koepsell; Ruoxiang Jiang; Véronique L Roger Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2018-08
Authors: Francisco J Martín-Sánchez; Michael Christ; Òscar Miró; W Frank Peacock; John J McMurray; Héctor Bueno; Alan S Maisel; Louise Cullen; Martin R Cowie; Salvatore Di Somma; Elke Platz; Josep Masip; Uwe Zeymer; Christiaan Vrints; Susanna Price; Christian Mueller Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2016-07-18 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Alanna M Chamberlain; Lila J Finney Rutten; Sheila M Manemann; Barbara P Yawn; Debra J Jacobson; Chun Fan; Brandon R Grossardt; Véronique L Roger; Jennifer L St Sauver Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 5.562