Ariela R Orkaby1,2,3, Lisa Nussbaum2, Yuk-Lam Ho2, David Gagnon2,4, Lien Quach2,5, Rachel Ward2, Rachel Quaden2, Enzo Yaksic2, Kelly Harrington2,6, Julie M Paik1,7, Dae H Kim8,9, Peter W Wilson2,10,11,12, J Michael Gaziano2,3, Luc Djousse2,3, Kelly Cho2,3, Jane A Driver1,2,3. 1. New England Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), VA Boston Healthcare System, Massachusetts. 2. Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC), Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Division of Aging, Department of Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Gerontology, University of Massachusetts Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, Massachusetts. 7. Renal Section, Department of Medicine, VA Boston Healthcare System, Massachusetts. 8. Division of Gerontology, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. 9. Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 10. Atlanta VA Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia. 11. Division of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 12. Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frailty is a key determinant of clinical outcomes. We sought to describe frailty among U.S. Veterans and its association with mortality. METHODS: Nationwide retrospective cohort study of regular Veterans Affairs (VA) users, aged at least 65 years in 2002-2012, followed through 2014, using national VA administrative and Medicare and Medicaid data. A frailty index (FI) for VA (VA-FI) was calculated using the cumulative deficit method. Thirty-one age-related deficits in health from diagnostic and procedure codes were included and were updated biennially. Survival analysis assessed associations between VA-FI and mortality. RESULTS: A VA-FI was calculated for 2,837,152 Veterans over 10 years. In 2002, 35.5% were non-frail (FI = 0-0.10), 32.6% were pre-frail (FI = 0.11-0.20), 18.9% were mildly frail (FI = 0.21-0.30), 8.7% were moderately frail (FI = 0.31-0.40), and 4.3% were severely frail (FI > 0.40). From 2002 to 2012, the prevalence of moderate frailty increased to 12.7%and severe frailty to 14.1%. Frailty was strongly associated with survival and was independent of age, sex, race, and smoking; the VA-FI better predicted mortality than age alone. Although prevalence of frailty rose over time, compared to non-frail Veterans, 2 years' hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for mortality declined from a peak in 2004 of 2.01 (1.97-2.04), 3.49 (3.44-3.55), 5.88 (5.79-5.97), and 10.39 (10.23-10.56) for pre-frail, mildly, moderately, and severely frail, respectively, to 1.51 (1.49-1.53), 2.36 (2.33-2.39), 3.68 (3.63-3.73), 6.62 (6.53-6.71) in 2012. At every frailty level, risk of mortality was lower for women versus men and higher for blacks versus whites. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty affects at least 3 of every 10 U.S. Veterans aged 65 years and older, and is strongly associated with mortality. The VA-FI could be used to more accurately estimate life expectancy and individualize care for Veterans. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America 2018.
BACKGROUND: Frailty is a key determinant of clinical outcomes. We sought to describe frailty among U.S. Veterans and its association with mortality. METHODS: Nationwide retrospective cohort study of regular Veterans Affairs (VA) users, aged at least 65 years in 2002-2012, followed through 2014, using national VA administrative and Medicare and Medicaid data. A frailty index (FI) for VA (VA-FI) was calculated using the cumulative deficit method. Thirty-one age-related deficits in health from diagnostic and procedure codes were included and were updated biennially. Survival analysis assessed associations between VA-FI and mortality. RESULTS: A VA-FI was calculated for 2,837,152 Veterans over 10 years. In 2002, 35.5% were non-frail (FI = 0-0.10), 32.6% were pre-frail (FI = 0.11-0.20), 18.9% were mildly frail (FI = 0.21-0.30), 8.7% were moderately frail (FI = 0.31-0.40), and 4.3% were severely frail (FI > 0.40). From 2002 to 2012, the prevalence of moderate frailty increased to 12.7%and severe frailty to 14.1%. Frailty was strongly associated with survival and was independent of age, sex, race, and smoking; the VA-FI better predicted mortality than age alone. Although prevalence of frailty rose over time, compared to non-frail Veterans, 2 years' hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for mortality declined from a peak in 2004 of 2.01 (1.97-2.04), 3.49 (3.44-3.55), 5.88 (5.79-5.97), and 10.39 (10.23-10.56) for pre-frail, mildly, moderately, and severely frail, respectively, to 1.51 (1.49-1.53), 2.36 (2.33-2.39), 3.68 (3.63-3.73), 6.62 (6.53-6.71) in 2012. At every frailty level, risk of mortality was lower for women versus men and higher for blacks versus whites. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty affects at least 3 of every 10 U.S. Veterans aged 65 years and older, and is strongly associated with mortality. The VA-FI could be used to more accurately estimate life expectancy and individualize care for Veterans. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America 2018.
Authors: Puja Van Epps; Terrence Tumpey; Melissa B Pearce; Hana Golding; Patricia Higgins; Thomas Hornick; Christopher Burant; Brigid M Wilson; Richard Banks; Stefan Gravenstein; David H Canaday Journal: Clin Vaccine Immunol Date: 2017-03-06
Authors: Stephanie Studenski; Subashan Perera; Kushang Patel; Caterina Rosano; Kimberly Faulkner; Marco Inzitari; Jennifer Brach; Julie Chandler; Peggy Cawthon; Elizabeth Barrett Connor; Michael Nevitt; Marjolein Visser; Stephen Kritchevsky; Stefania Badinelli; Tamara Harris; Anne B Newman; Jane Cauley; Luigi Ferrucci; Jack Guralnik Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ariela R Orkaby; Tammy T Hshieh; John M Gaziano; Luc Djousse; Jane A Driver Journal: Arch Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2017-02-20 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Laura Dwyer-Lindgren; Amelia Bertozzi-Villa; Rebecca W Stubbs; Chloe Morozoff; Johan P Mackenbach; Frank J van Lenthe; Ali H Mokdad; Christopher J L Murray Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 21.873
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: Nicholas M Pajewski; Kristin Lenoir; Brian J Wells; Jeff D Williamson; Kathryn E Callahan Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Olga Theou; Alexandra M van der Valk; Judith Godin; Melissa K Andrew; Janet E McElhaney; Shelly A McNeil; Kenneth Rockwood Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Quinn P Hosler; Anthony J Maltagliati; Sandra M Shi; Jonathan Afilalo; Jeffrey J Popma; Kamal R Khabbaz; Roger J Laham; Kimberly Guibone; Dae Hyun Kim Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Katherine B Santosa; Yen-Ling Lai; Chad M Brummett; Jeremie D Oliver; Hsou-Mei Hu; Michael J Englesbe; Emilie M Blair; Jennifer F Waljee Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Brianne L Olivieri-Mui; Sandra M Shi; Ellen P McCarthy; Daniel Habtemariam; Dae H Kim Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-11-25 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Saket R Sanghai; Weisong Liu; Weijia Wang; Subendhu Rongali; Ariela R Orkaby; Jane S Saczynski; Adam J Rose; Alok Kapoor; Wenjun Li; Hong Yu; David D McManus Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 5.128