Validation of replacement questions for slowness and weakness to assess the Fried Phenotype: a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: When screening large populations, performance-based measures can be difficult to conduct because they are time consuming and costly, and require well-trained assessors. The aim of the present study is to validate a set of questions replacing the performance-based measures slowness and weakness as part of the Fried frailty phenotype (FRIED-P). METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among community-dwelling older adults (≥ 60 years) in three Flemish municipalities. The Fried Phenotype (FRIED-P) was used to measure physical frailty. The two performance-based measures of the Fried Phenotype (slowness and weakness) were also measured by means of six substituting questions (FRIED-Q). These questions were validated through sensitivity, specificity, Cohen's kappa value, observed agreement, correlation analysis, and the area under the curve (AUC, ROC curve). RESULTS: 196 older adults participated. According to the FRIED-P, 19.5% of them were frail, 56.9% were pre-frail and 23.6% were non-frail. For slowness, the observed sensitivity was 47.0%, the specificity was 96.5% and the AUC was 0.717. For weakness, the sensitivity was 46.2%, the specificity was 83.7%, and the AUC was 0.649. The overall Spearman correlation between the FRIED-P and the FRIED-Q was r = 0.721 with an observed agreement of 76.6% (weighted linear kappa value = 0.663, quadratic kappa value = 0.738). CONCLUSIONS: The concordance between the FRIED-P and FRIED-Q was substantial, characterized by a very high specificity, but a moderate sensitivity. This alternative operationalization of the Fried Phenotype-i.e., including six replacement questions instead of two performance-based tests-can be considered to apply as screening tool to screen physical frailty in large populations.

Exploring Cognitive Frailty: Prevalence and Associations with Other Frailty Domains in Older People with Different Degrees of Cognitive Impairment.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive frailty has long been defined as the co-occurrence of mild cognitive deficits and physical frailty. However, recently, a new approach to cognitive frailty has been proposed: cognitive frailty as a distinct construct. Nonetheless, the relationship between this relatively new construct of cognitive frailty and other frailty domains is unclear. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to explore the prevalence of cognitive frailty in groups with different degrees of cognitive impairment, as well as to explore the associations between frailty domains, and if this varies with level of objective cognitive impairment. METHOD: Cross-sectional, secondary data from 3 research projects among community-dwelling people aged ≥60 years, with different degrees of objective cognitive impairment, were used: (1) a randomly selected sample (n = 353); (2) a sample at an increased risk of frailty (n = 95); and (3) a sample of memory clinic patients who scored 0.5 on the Clinical Dementia Rating scale - according to the "original" definition of cognitive frailty (n = 47). Multidimensional frailty was assessed with the Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument - Plus and general cognitive functioning with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Descriptive statistics and linear regression were used to determine the prevalence of cognitive frailty and to explore the relationship between cognitive frailty and the other types of frailty in each sample. RESULTS: The prevalence of cognitive frailty increased along with the degree of objective cognitive impairment in the 3 samples (range 35.1-80.9%), while its co-occurrence with (one of) the other types of frailty was most frequent in the frail and community samples. Regarding its relationship with the other domains, cognitive frailty was positively associated with psychological frailty's subdomain mood disorder symptoms in all 3 samples (p ≤ 0.01), while there was no significant association with environmental frailty and social loneliness. The associations between cognitive frailty and the other types of frailty differed between the samples. CONCLUSION: Psychological and cognitive frailty are strongly associated, irrespective of the objective degree of cognitive impairment. In addition, it is shown that cognitive frailty can occur independently from the other frailty domains, including physical frailty, and therefore it can be seen as a distinct concept.

Concordances and differences between a unidimensional and multidimensional assessment of frailty: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Many instruments to identify frail older people have been developed. One of the consequences is that the prevalence rates of frailty vary widely dependent on the instrument selected. The aims of this study were 1) to examine the concordances and differences between a unidimensional and multidimensional assessment of frailty, 2) to assess to what extent the characteristics of a 'frail sample' differ depending on the selected frailty measurement because 'being frail' is used in many studies as an inclusion criterion. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 196 community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years), which were selected from the census records. Unidimensional frailty was operationalized according to the Fried Phenotype (FP) and multidimensional frailty was measured with the Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument (CFAI). The concordances and differences were examined by prevalence, correlations, observed agreement and Kappa values. Differences between sample characteristics (e.g., age, physical activity, life satisfaction) were investigated with ANOVA and Kruskall-Wallis test. RESULTS: The mean age was 72.74 (SD 8.04) and 48.98% was male. According to the FP 23.59% was not-frail, 56.92% pre-frail and 19.49% frail. According to the CFAI, 44.33% was no-to-low frail, 37.63% was mild frail and 18.04% was high frail. The correlation between FP and the CFAI was r = 0.46 and the observed agreement was 52.85%. The Kappa value was κ = 0.35 (quadratic κ = 0.45). In total, 11.92% of the participants were frail according to both measurements, 7.77% was solely frail according to the FP and 6.21% was solely frail according to the CFAI. The 'frail sample respondents' according to the FP had higher levels of life satisfaction and net income, but performed less physical activities in comparison to high frail people according to the CFAI. CONCLUSION: The present study shows that the FP and CFAI partly measure the same 'frailty-construct', although differences were found for instance in the prevalence of frailty and the composition of the 'frail participants'. Since 'being frail' is an inclusion criterion in many studies, researchers must be aware that the choice of the frailty measurement has an impact on both the estimates of frailty prevalence and the characteristics of the selected sample.

Critical reflections on the blind sides of frailty in later life.

Since the 1970's, frailty emerged as a major theme and has become one of the most researched topics in aging studies. However, throughout the years, the concept 'frailty' became susceptible to different interpretations and has been approached by different synonyms, which resulted in a confusing picture. Based on a narrative literature review, this theoretical paper not only attempts to describe these different views on frailty, but by criticizing the dominance of some of these views, it also aspires to move the research and policy agenda on frailty forward. This paper is part of the D-SCOPE project in Belgium, and critically reflects on the blind sides of the biomedical domination of frailty and discusses three main themes: 1) frailty as a multidimensional and multilevel concept; 2) positive perspectives on frailty in later life; and 3) the suggestion of moving from a merely deficit-based frailty approach towards the concept of frailty-balance. At the theoretical level, conceptualizing frailty is not simply an exercise in semantics, but altering the theoretical definition of frailty can have wide-ranging implications, not only for the way frailty prevalence is measured and handled, but also for public or personal opinions on frailty in older people, for care and support practices, and for the scope of legislation. Therefore, the final section of the paper presents three building blocks for future research and policy-making: 1) adopting a multidimensional, multilevel, dynamic and positive view on frailty; 2) moving from dependency to interdependency; and 3) giving voice to (the resilience of) frail older people.

[Explaining discrepancies in self-reported quality of life in frail older people: a mixed-methods study]. / Het verklaren van verschillen in ervaren kwaliteit van leven van kwetsbare ouderen: een 'mixed-method' onderzoek.

Most research on (multidimensional) frailty focuses on deficits and risks of adverse outcomes. However, frail older people can still report positive outcomes, such as a relatively high QoL. In order to develop more positively oriented prevention strategies, this exploratory study aimed (a) to identify characteristics related to QoL among frail older people; and (b) to explain discrepancies between higher and lower levels of QoL, with a specific focus on strengths frail older people with a higher QoL still may have. Quantitative and qualitative data was gathered by means of semi-structured interviews with Flemish community-dwelling, frail older people with higher (n = 16) and lower QoL levels (n = 18). Quantitative analyses showed that frail older people with a higher QoL were older, had lower levels of psychological frailty, and reported higher meaning in life compared to those with a lower QoL. Outcomes of qualitative analysis showed that participants in the high QoL subgroup adapted more effectively to difficulties, had more things in prospect, performed more activities, and were more satisfied with their social network compared to the low QoL subgroup. To conclude, this exploratory study suggests possibilities to promote and improve QoL by strengthening specific resources among frail older people.Please note that an English version of this article has been published in BMC Geriatrics: van der Vorst A, Zijlstra GAR, De Witte N, Vogel RGM, Schols JMGA, Kempen GIJM, D­SCOPE Consortium. Explaining discrepancies in self-reported quality of life in frail older people: a mixed-methods study. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17(1): 251. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0641-y .

Randomized controlled trial to evaluate a prevention program for frail community-dwelling older adults: a D-SCOPE protocol.

BACKGROUND: Frail community-dwelling older adults, whom might experience problems regarding physical, cognitive, psychological, social and environmental factors, are at risk for adverse outcomes such as disability, institutionalization and mortality. People in need of help do not always find their way to care and support services and are left undetected. The aim of the D-SCOPE project is to detect frail community-dwelling older adults who previously went unnoticed and to improve their access to care and support. Goal is to increase their frailty-balance, quality of life, meaning in life, life satisfaction, mastery, community inclusion and ageing well in place. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a prospective, longitudinal randomized four-armed controlled trial with follow-up at 6 months. The study group aims to include 900 community-dwelling older adults aged 60 years and over from 3 municipalities in Flanders (Belgium). While selecting the study group, risk profiles for frailty will be taken into account. Participants will be randomly selected from the census records in each municipality. Data will be collected prospectively at baseline (T0) and at follow-up, 6 months after baseline (T1). At baseline, participants who are at least mild frail on one of the 5 domains of frailty (CFAI-plus) or feel frail based on the subjective assessment of frailty will be randomly assigned to (1) the study group or (2) the control group. A mixed method design with the inclusion of quantitative and qualitative data analyses will be used to evaluate the efficacy and experiences of the detection and prevention program on frailty. DISCUSSION: The study will contribute to an innovative vision concerning the organization of care and support, and a timely and accurate detection and support of community-dwelling older adults at risk for frailty. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, on May 26, 2017, identifier: NCT03168204 .

The impact of multidimensional frailty on dependency in activities of daily living and the moderating effects of protective factors.

BACKGROUND: Dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) might be caused by multidimensional frailty. Prevention is important as ADL dependency might threaten the ability to age in place. Therefore, this study aimed to assess whether protective factors, derived from a systematic literature review, moderate the relationship between multidimensional frailty and ADL dependency, and whether this differs across age groups. METHODS: A longitudinal study with a follow-up after 24 months was conducted among 1027 community-dwelling people aged ≥65 years. Multidimensional frailty was measured with the Tilburg Frailty Indicator, and ADL dependency with the ADL subscale from the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. Other measures included socio-demographic characteristics and seven protective factors against ADL dependency, such as physical activity and non-smoking. Logistic regression analyses with interaction terms were conducted. RESULTS: Frail older people had a twofold risk of developing ADL dependency after 24 months in comparison to non-frail older people (OR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.45-3.00). The selected protective factors against ADL dependency did not significantly moderate this relationship. Nonetheless, higher levels of physical activity decreased the risk of becoming ADL dependent (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.46-0.98), as well as having sufficient financial resources (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.35-0.71). CONCLUSION: Multidimensional frail older people have a higher risk of developing ADL dependency. The studied protective factors against ADL dependency did not significantly moderate this relationship.

Detecting frail, older adults and identifying their strengths: results of a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: The debate on frailty in later life focuses primarily on deficits and their associations with adverse (health) outcomes. In addition to deficits, it may also be important to consider the abilities and resources of older adults. This study was designed to gain insights into the lived experiences of frailty among older adults to determine which strengths can balance the deficits that affect frailty. METHODS: Data from 121 potentially frail community-dwelling older adults in Flemish-speaking Region of Belgium and Brussels were collected using a mixed-methods approach. Quantitative data were collected using the Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument (CFAI), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and numeric rating scales (NRS) for quality of life (QoL), care and support, meaning in life, and mastery. Bivariate analyses, paired samples t-tests and means were performed. Qualitative data on experiences of frailty, frailty balance, QoL, care and support, meaning in life, and mastery were collected using semi-structured interviews. Interviews were subjected to thematic content analysis. RESULTS: The "no to mild frailty" group had higher QoL, care and support, meaning in life, and mastery scores than the "severe frailty" group. Nevertheless, qualitative results indicate that, despite being classified as frail, many older adults experienced high levels of QoL, care and support, meaning in life, and mastery. Respondents mentioned multiple balancing factors for frailty, comprising individual-level circumstances (e.g., personality traits, coping strategies, resilience), environmental influences (e.g., caregivers, neighborhood, social participation), and macro-level features (e.g., health literacy, adequate financial compensation). Respondents also highlighted that life changes affected their frailty balance, including changes in health, finances, personal relationships, and living situation. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that frailty among older individuals can be considered as a dynamic state and, regardless of frailty, balancing factors are important in maintaining a good QoL. The study investigated not only the deficits, but also the abilities, and resources of frail, older adults. Public policymakers and healthcare organizations are encouraged to include these abilities, supplementary or even complementary to the usual focus on deficits.

Can proxy assessments serve as a first screener for identifying people at risk for multidimensional frailty?

PURPOSE: Timely detection of multidimensional frailty is important to prevent further negative outcomes. Perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) or informal caregivers might serve as a first, global screener to identify older people in need of a more extended assessment. Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether proxy assessments are associated with older people's self-reported environmental, physical, psychological, social and overall frailty. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 78 community-dwelling people aged 60 years and over, their GPs (n = 57) and informal caregivers (n = 50). Self-reported frailty was assessed with the Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument. GPs and informal caregivers rated each frailty domain and overall frailty on a scale of 0 (not frail at all) to 10 (severely frail). Associations between proxy scores and self-reported frailty were examined by correlation analyses. RESULTS: Significant low to moderate associations were found between (1) self-reported physical frailty and physical frailty scores given by the GPs (r = 0.366, p ≤ 0.01) and informal caregivers (r = 0.305, p ≤ 0.05), and (2) self-reported psychological frailty and psychological frailty scores given by the GPs (r = 0.230, p ≤ 0.05) and informal caregivers (r = 0.254, p ≤ 0.05). No significant associations were found between proxy scores and self-reported environmental, social and overall frailty. CONCLUSIONS: Global proxy scores as short, subjective screeners for detecting frailty cannot completely replace self-reported frailty. Nonetheless, low to moderate correlations were found for physical and psychological frailty ratings, suggesting that proxy scores might be of value as a first sign of something being wrong for these domains.

Explaining discrepancies in self-reported quality of life in frail older people: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Most research on multidimensional frailty focuses on deficits and risks of adverse outcomes. However, although some frail older people report a low quality of life (QoL), others still report a relatively high QoL. More knowledge about these discrepancies might give new insight into developing frailty prevention strategies. Therefore, this mixed-method study aimed (a) to identify characteristics related to QoL among frail older people; and (b) to explain discrepancies between higher and lower levels of QoL, with a specific interest in identifying strengths frail older people with a higher QoL still have. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were held with community-dwelling, frail older people with higher (n = 16) and lower levels of QoL (n = 18). Frailty was assessed with the Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument, which measures environmental, physical, psychological, and social frailty. Other quantitative measures included socio-demographic characteristics, overall QoL, meaning in life, and mastery. The qualitative part focused on the meaning and maintenance of QoL (among other factors), despite being frail. Possible explanations for discrepancies in QoL were explored. RESULTS: Frail older people with a higher QoL were older, had lower levels of psychological frailty, and reported higher meaning in life compared to those with a lower QoL. Outcomes of qualitative analysis showed that participants in the high QoL subgroup adapted more effectively to difficulties, had more things in prospect, performed more activities, and were more satisfied with their social network compared to the low QoL subgroup. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study suggests possibilities to promote and improve QoL by strengthening specific resources among frail older people.

Correction: Limitations in Activities of Daily Living in Community-Dwelling People Aged 75 and Over: A Systematic Literature Review of Risk and Protective Factors.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165127.].

Identifying frailty risk profiles of home-dwelling older people: focus on sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics.

OBJECTIVES: This paper investigates risk profiles of frailty among older people, as these are essential for detecting those individuals at risk for adverse outcomes and to undertake specific preventive actions. Frailty is not only a physical problem, but also refers to emotional, social, and environmental hazards. METHODS: Using data generated from the Belgian Ageing Studies, a cross-sectional study (n = 28,049), we tested a multivariate regression model that included sociodemographic and socioeconomic indicators as well as four dimensions of frailty, for men and women separately. RESULTS: The findings indicated that for both men and women, increased age, having no partner, having moved house in the previous 10 years, having a lower educational level and having a lower household income are risk characteristics for frailty. Moreover, when looking at the different frailty domains, different risk profiles arose, and gender-specific risk characteristics were detected. DISCUSSION: This paper elaborates on practical implications, and formulates a number of future research recommendations to tackle frailty in an aging society. The conclusion demonstrates the necessity for a thorough knowledge of risk profiles of frailty, as this will save both time and money and permit preventive actions to be more individually tailored.

Limitations in Activities of Daily Living in Community-Dwelling People Aged 75 and Over: A Systematic Literature Review of Risk and Protective Factors.

BACKGROUND: Most older people wish to age in place, for which functional status or being able to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) is an important precondition. However, along with the substantial growth of the (oldest) old, the number of people who develop limitations in ADLs or have functional decline dramatically increases in this part of the population. Therefore, it is important to gain insight into factors that can contribute to developing intervention strategies at older ages. As a first step, this systematic review was conducted to identify risk and protective factors as predictors for developing limitations in ADLs in community-dwelling people aged 75 and over. METHODS: Four electronic databases (CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE, PsycINFO and PubMed) were searched systematically for potentially relevant studies published between January 1998 and March 2016. RESULTS: After a careful selection process, 6,910 studies were identified and 25 were included. By far most factors were examined in one study only, and most were considered risk factors. Several factors do not seem to be able to predict the development of limitations in ADLs in people aged 75 years and over, and for some factors ambiguous associations were found. The following risk factors were found in at least two studies: higher age, female gender, diabetes, hypertension, and stroke. A high level of physical activity and being married were protective in multiple studies. Notwithstanding the fact that research in people aged 65 years and over is more extensive, risk and protective factors seem to differ between the 'younger' and 'older' olds. CONCLUSION: Only a few risk and protective factors in community-dwelling people aged 75 years and over have been analysed in multiple studies. However, the identified factors could serve both detection and prevention purposes, and implications for future research are given as well.