S Freitag1, S Schmidt2, R J J Gobbens3. 1. Department Health & Prevention, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-University Greifswald, Robert-Blum-Str. 13, 17487, Greifswald, Germany. simone.freitag@uni-greifswald.de. 2. Department Health & Prevention, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-University Greifswald, Robert-Blum-Str. 13, 17487, Greifswald, Germany. silke.schmidt@uni-greifswald.de. 3. Faculty of Health, Sports and Social Work, Inholland University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. robbert.gobbens@inholland.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Tilburg frailty indicator (TFI) is a self-report measurement instrument which integrates the physical, psychological and social domains to assess frailty in older adults. The aim of this study was the adaptation of the TFI to a German version and testing of the psychometric properties. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study surveyed 210 individuals aged 64-91 years living at home. The mean age of participants was M = 75.3±5.7 years with 62 % females. The internal consistency was tested with Cronbach's alpha. The test-retest reliability was calculated after 20 weeks. The German TFI was validated using alternative measures for assessment of the quality of life, e.g. Eurohis-QoL-8 and short form health survey (SF-12), the patient health questionnaire (PHQ), the geriatric anxiety inventory short form (GAI-SF), the social support scale (F-Soz-U-K-14) and the resilience scale (RS-11). RESULTS: The internal consistency was acceptable with a value for Cronbach's alpha of 0.67. The test-retest reliability was good after 5 months α = 0.87 (physical domain r = 0.85, psychological domain r = 0.75 and social domain r = 0.84). The inter-item correlations ranged between - 0.06 and 0.57. Correlations with alternative frailty measures showed good convergent and divergent validity. CONCLUSION: This study showed acceptable psychometric properties of the German adaptation of the TFI which was found to be age and frailty sensitive. The results of the validity of the TFI support the three domains integrated in the frailty score. Further application and testing of the German TFI in primary care and clinical settings are suggested to consolidate the findings.
BACKGROUND: The Tilburg frailty indicator (TFI) is a self-report measurement instrument which integrates the physical, psychological and social domains to assess frailty in older adults. The aim of this study was the adaptation of the TFI to a German version and testing of the psychometric properties. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study surveyed 210 individuals aged 64-91 years living at home. The mean age of participants was M = 75.3±5.7 years with 62 % females. The internal consistency was tested with Cronbach's alpha. The test-retest reliability was calculated after 20 weeks. The German TFI was validated using alternative measures for assessment of the quality of life, e.g. Eurohis-QoL-8 and short form health survey (SF-12), the patient health questionnaire (PHQ), the geriatric anxiety inventory short form (GAI-SF), the social support scale (F-Soz-U-K-14) and the resilience scale (RS-11). RESULTS: The internal consistency was acceptable with a value for Cronbach's alpha of 0.67. The test-retest reliability was good after 5 months α = 0.87 (physical domain r = 0.85, psychological domain r = 0.75 and social domain r = 0.84). The inter-item correlations ranged between - 0.06 and 0.57. Correlations with alternative frailty measures showed good convergent and divergent validity. CONCLUSION: This study showed acceptable psychometric properties of the German adaptation of the TFI which was found to be age and frailty sensitive. The results of the validity of the TFI support the three domains integrated in the frailty score. Further application and testing of the German TFI in primary care and clinical settings are suggested to consolidate the findings.
Entities:
Keywords:
German translation; Psychometric properties; Reliability; Tilburg frailty indicator; Validity
Authors: U Dapp; R Fertmann; J Anders; S Schmidt; F Pröfener; C Deneke; C Minder; J Hasford; W von Renteln-Kruse Journal: Z Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 1.281
Authors: Howard Bergman; Luigi Ferrucci; Jack Guralnik; David B Hogan; Silvia Hummel; Sathya Karunananthan; Christina Wolfson Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Lívia Maria Santiago; Laércio Lima Luz; Inês Echenique Mattos; Robbert J J Gobbens; Marcel A L M van Assen Journal: Arch Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Robbert J J Gobbens; Marcel A L M van Assen; Katrien G Luijkx; Maria Th Wijnen-Sponselee; Jos M G A Schols Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2010-05-08 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Silke F Metzelthin; Ramon Daniëls; Erik van Rossum; Luc de Witte; Wim J A van den Heuvel; Gertrudis I J M Kempen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-03-31 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Nicoleta Stoicea; Ramya Baddigam; Jennifer Wajahn; Angela C Sipes; Carlos E Arias-Morales; Nicholas Gastaldo; Sergio D Bergese Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2016-07-21
Authors: Jossiana Wilke Faller; David do Nascimento Pereira; Suzana de Souza; Fernando Kenji Nampo; Fabiana de Souza Orlandi; Silvia Matumoto Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Gotaro Kojima; Steve Iliffe; Richard W Morris; Yu Taniguchi; Denise Kendrick; Dawn A Skelton; Tahir Masud; Ann Bowling Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-01-09 Impact factor: 4.147