Literature DB >> 25952475

A Frailty Index Based on Common Laboratory Tests in Comparison With a Clinical Frailty Index for Older Adults in Long-Term Care Facilities.

Kenneth Rockwood1, Miranda McMillan2, Arnold Mitnitski3, Susan E Howlett4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Easily employed measures of frailty are needed in the evaluation of elderly people. Recently, a frailty index (FI) based on deficits in commonly used laboratory tests (the FI-LAB) has been proposed. To address the usefulness of the FI-LAB in long-term care (LTC) settings, we studied institutionalized participants in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging first clinical examination database. Our objectives were to compare the FI-LAB with a clinical FI LTC (FI-Clinical-LTC) focused on common health deficits seen in LTC and to assay its relationship with mortality.
METHODS: In this secondary analysis, Canadian Study of Health and Aging first clinical examination participants who, at baseline, were LTC residents, and who consented to having blood drawn for 21 commonly employed laboratory tests (eg, complete blood count, electrolytes, renal, thyroid, and liver function) were studied. A 23-item FI-LAB was constructed based on the 21 laboratory tests, plus measures of systolic and diastolic blood pressure. The FI-Clinical-LTC was constructed from data obtained during the clinical evaluation and the FI-LAB was constructed from laboratory data plus systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements. A combined FI (FI-Combined) included all items from each index. Predictive validity was tested using Cox proportional hazards analysis and overall utility was evaluated using the Akaike Information Criterion and the Wald statistic.
RESULTS: The mean FI-Clinical-LTC was 0.32 ± 0.14, the FI-LAB was 0.26 ± 0.11 and the FI-Combined was 0.30 ± 0.11. There was a strong linear relationship (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.95) between the FI-LAB and the FI-Clinical-LTC, with a significant slope of 0.18 (P value of <.0001). Strong relationships with mortality were demonstrated through Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regressions, with the FI-Clinical-LTC having a hazard ratio of 1.03, FI-LAB ratio of 1.02, and FI-combined ratio of 1.04 for each 0.01 increment in the corresponding FI in age and sex adjusted models.
CONCLUSIONS: An FI based on routinely collected laboratory data can identify LTC residents at increased risk of death. This approach may be a useful screening tool in this setting.
Copyright © 2015 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Frailty; aged; frailty index; geriatric assessment; laboratory tests; nursing home

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25952475     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.03.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc        ISSN: 1525-8610            Impact factor:   4.669


  29 in total

1.  Combined Inflammation and Metabolism Biomarker Indices of Robust and Impaired Physical Function in Older Adults.

Authors:  Xintong Zuo; Alison Luciano; Carl F Pieper; James R Bain; Virginia B Kraus; William E Kraus; Miriam C Morey; Harvey J Cohen
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 5.562

2.  Frailty indices based on self-report, blood-based biomarkers and examination-based data in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging.

Authors:  Joanna M Blodgett; Mario U Pérez-Zepeda; Judith Godin; D Scott Kehler; Melissa K Andrew; Susan Kirkland; Kenneth Rockwood; Olga Theou
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  2022-05-01       Impact factor: 12.782

3.  Identifying and Implementing Endpoints for Geriatric Mice.

Authors:  Linda A Toth
Journal:  Comp Med       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 0.982

Review 4.  Dynamics of biomarkers in relation to aging and mortality.

Authors:  Konstantin G Arbeev; Svetlana V Ukraintseva; Anatoliy I Yashin
Journal:  Mech Ageing Dev       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 5.432

5.  Comparative trends in incident fracture rates for all long-term care and community-dwelling seniors in Ontario, Canada, 2002-2012.

Authors:  A Papaioannou; C C Kennedy; G Ioannidis; C Cameron; R Croxford; J D Adachi; S Mursleen; S Jaglal
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Heterogeneity of Human Aging and Its Assessment.

Authors:  Arnold Mitnitski; Susan E Howlett; Kenneth Rockwood
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 6.053

7.  Development and Validation of a Clinical Frailty Index for the World Trade Center General Responder Cohort.

Authors:  Ghalib A Bello; Katherine A Ornstein; Roberto G Lucchini; William W Hung; Fred C Ko; Elena Colicino; Emanuela Taioli; Michael A Crane; Andrew C Todd
Journal:  J Aging Health       Date:  2021-03-12

8.  Complementing chronic frailty assessment at hospital admission with an electronic frailty index (FI-Laboratory) comprising routine blood test results.

Authors:  Hugh Logan Ellis; Bettina Wan; Michael Yeung; Arshad Rather; Imran Mannan; Catherine Bond; Catherine Harvey; Nadia Raja; Peter Dutey-Magni; Kenneth Rockwood; Daniel Davis; Samuel D Searle
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Operationalizing a frailty index using routine blood and urine tests.

Authors:  Martin Ritt; Jakob Jäger; Julia Isabel Ritt; Cornel Christian Sieber; Karl-Günter Gaßmann
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 4.458

Review 10.  Determination of Biological Age: Geriatric Assessment vs Biological Biomarkers.

Authors:  Lucas W M Diebel; Kenneth Rockwood
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 5.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.