Emmanuel Navarro-Flores1, Ricardo Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo2, Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias3, Patricia Palomo-López4, César Calvo-Lobo2, Daniel López-López5, Eva Maria Martínez-Jiménez6, Carlos Romero-Morales7. 1. Faculty of Nursing and Podiatry, Department of Nursing, University of Valencia, Frailty Research Organized Group (FROG), Valencia, Spain. 2. School of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 3. Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain. 4. University Center of Plasencia, Universidad de Extremadura, Plasencia, Spain. 5. Research, Health and Podiatry Group, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Nursing and Podiatry, Universidade da Coruña, A Coruña, Spain. 6. Antonio Nebrija University, Madrid, Spain. 7. Faculty of Sport Sciences, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Villaviciosa de Odón, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
The Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) is an index employed to measure alterations related to frailty. The main objective in this research was to develop the EFS short-form (EFS-SF) and to evaluate its validity, reliability, and sensitivity to predict frailty disability outcomes in elderly patients with foot disabilities. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the EFS-SF revealed the presence of three components, as in the original EFA. There were significant differences (p < 0.05) in the study population for several of the EFS and 5-item FRAIL scale indicators. The highest correlation (Pearson R = 0.871; p < 0.001) was found for the first component of the EFS-SF. Finally, the Cronbach alpha was 0.864 which indicated a high level of internal consistency. CONCLUSION: The EFS-SF is a reliable and valid instrument to measure frailty in patients with and without foot disabilities. METHOD: A cross sectional descriptive study was carried out. The study population was aged over 60 years (n = 66) and comprised 29 men and 37 women. Frailty disorders were registered by using the EFS, 5-item FRAIL scale, and the Geriatricians' Clinical Impression of Frailty (GCIF) scale. EFA was employed to locate potential constituents of the EFS, with scores ranging from 0.596 to 0.946 for each of the sub scales: (1) cognitive and general health status; (2) medication and nutrition status; and (3) functional and physiological status, thus revealing that the EFS-SF comprised three components, a reduction compared to the nine in the original EFS.
The Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) is an index employed to measure alterations related to frailty. The main objective in this research was to develop the EFS short-form (EFS-SF) and to evaluate its validity, reliability, and sensitivity to predict frailty disability outcomes in elderly patients with foot disabilities. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the EFS-SF revealed the presence of three components, as in the original EFA. There were significant differences (p < 0.05) in the study population for several of the EFS and 5-item FRAIL scale indicators. The highest correlation (Pearson R = 0.871; p < 0.001) was found for the first component of the EFS-SF. Finally, the Cronbach alpha was 0.864 which indicated a high level of internal consistency. CONCLUSION: The EFS-SF is a reliable and valid instrument to measure frailty in patients with and without foot disabilities. METHOD: A cross sectional descriptive study was carried out. The study population was aged over 60 years (n = 66) and comprised 29 men and 37 women. Frailty disorders were registered by using the EFS, 5-item FRAIL scale, and the Geriatricians' Clinical Impression of Frailty (GCIF) scale. EFA was employed to locate potential constituents of the EFS, with scores ranging from 0.596 to 0.946 for each of the sub scales: (1) cognitive and general health status; (2) medication and nutrition status; and (3) functional and physiological status, thus revealing that the EFS-SF comprised three components, a reduction compared to the nine in the original EFS.
Authors: María Reina-Bueno; Carmen Vázquez-Bautista; Inmaculada C Palomo-Toucedo; Gabriel Domínguez-Maldonado; José Manuel Castillo-López; Pedro V Munuera-Martínez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: José Daniel Jiménez-García; Fidel Hita-Contreras; Manuel Jesús de la Torre-Cruz; Agustín Aibar-Almazán; Alexander Achalandabaso-Ochoa; Raquel Fábrega-Cuadros; Antonio Martínez-Amat Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Susana León-Ramón; Emmanuel Navarro-Flores; Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias; Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo; Ana María Jiménez-Cebrián; Carlos Romero-Morales; Patricia Palomo-López; Daniel López-López Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-02-14
Authors: Husna Ahmad Ainuddin; Muhammad Hibatullah Romli; Tengku Aizan Hamid; Mazatulfazura S F Salim; Hazwan Mat Din; Lynette Mackenzie Journal: Occup Ther Int Date: 2022-03-16 Impact factor: 1.448
Authors: Anh Trung Nguyen; Huong Thi Thu Nguyen; Huong Thi Thanh Nguyen; Thanh Xuan Nguyen; Tam Ngoc Nguyen; Thu Thi Hoai Nguyen; Anh Lan Nguyen; Thang Pham; Huyen Thi Thanh Vu Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-09 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Eva María Martínez-Jiménez; Héctor Pereiro-Buceta; Patricia Palomo-López; Emmanuel Navarro-Flores; Ana María Jiménez-Cebrián; Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias; Ricardo Becerro-De-Bengoa-Vallejo; Daniel López-López Journal: Biology (Basel) Date: 2021-12-26
Authors: Bibiana Trevisson; Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo; David Sevillano; Natalia González; Marta Losa-Iglesias; Daniel López-López; Luis Alou Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2021-06-11 Impact factor: 3.315