The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2318-14-27) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
ID, MJS, MEN and NJW contributed to the study concept and design. ID drafted the manuscript. ID and GK selected relevant studies independently, and ID extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. ID, NJW, NB, MEN and MJS provided a critical review of this manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of this manuscript.
To better accommodate for the complex care needs of frail, older people, general practitioners must be capable of easily identifying frailty in daily clinical practice, for example, by using the frailty index (FI). To explore whether the FI is a valid and adequate screening instrument for primary care, we conducted a systematic review of its psychometric properties.
We searched the Cochrane, PubMed and Embase databases and included original studies focusing on the criterion validity, construct validity and responsiveness of the FI when applied in community-dwelling older people. We evaluated the quality of the studies included using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. This systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA statement.
Of the twenty studies identified, eighteen reported on FIs derived from research data, one reported upon an FI derived from an administrative database of home-care clients, and one reported upon an FI derived from routine primary care data. In general, the FI showed good criterion and construct validity but lacked studies on responsiveness. When compared with studies that used data gathered for research purposes, there are indications that the FI mean score and range might be different in datasets using routine primary care data; however, this finding needs further investigation.
Our results suggest that the FI is a valid frailty screening instrument. However, further research using routine Electronic Medical Record data is necessary to investigate whether the psychometric properties of the FI are generalizable to a primary care setting and to facilitate its interpretation and implementation in daily clinical practice.
PROSPERO systematic review register number: CRD42013003737.
Moorhouse P, Rockwood K: Frailty and its quantitative clinical evaluation. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 2012, 42: 333-340.
Mitnitski AB, Mogilner AJ, Rockwood K: Accumulation of deficits as a proxy measure of aging. Scientific World J. 2001, 8: 323-36. CrossRef
Pijpers E, Ferreira I, Stehouwer CD, Nieuwenhuijzen Kruseman AC: The frailty dilemma. review of the predictive accuracy of major frailty scores. Eur J Int Med. 2012, 23: 118-123. 10.1016/j.ejim.2011.09.003. CrossRef
McDowell I, Newell C: Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 1996, New York: Oxford University Press, 2
Kulminski AM, Ukraintseva SV, Kulminskaya IV, Arbeev KG, Land K, Yashin AI: Cumulative deficits better characterize susceptibility to death in elderly people than phenotypic frailty: lessons from the cardiovascular health study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008, 56: 898-903. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01656.x. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Kulminski A, Yashin A, Arbeev K, Akushevich I, Ukraintseva S, Land K, Manton K: Cumulative index of health disorders as an indicator of aging-associated processes in the elderly: results from analyses of the national long term care survey. Mech Ageing Dev. 2007, 128: 250-258. 10.1016/j.mad.2006.12.004. CrossRefPubMed
Fang X, Shi J, Song X, Mitnitski A, Tang Z, Wang C, Yu P, Rockwood K: Frailty in relation to the risk of falls, fractures, and mortality in older chinese adults: results from the Beijing longitudinal study of aging. J Nutr Health Aging. 2012, 33: 1-5.
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC: The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010, 10: 22-10.1186/1471-2288-10-22. 2288-10-22 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, Seeman T, Tracy R, Kop WJ, Burke G, McBurnie MA, Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group: Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001, 56: M146-M156. 10.1093/gerona/56.3.M146. CrossRefPubMed
Rockwood K, Mitnitski A: Frailty, fitness, and the mathematics of deficit accumulation. Rev Clin Gerontol. 2007, 17: 1-12. CrossRef
Mitnitski AB, Fallah N, Rockwood K: Changes in cognition in relation to frailty in older canadians. Alzheimers Dement. 2009, 5: 391- CrossRef
Song X, Mitnitski A, Rockwood K: Frailty and alzheimer’s disease in older men and women: results from a population-based study. Alzheimers Dement. 2009, 5: 129- CrossRef
Tajar A, O’Connell MD, Mitnitski AB, O'Neill TW, Searle SD, Huhtaniemi IT, Finn JD, Bartfai G, Boonen S, Casanueva FF, Forti G, Giwercman A, Han TS, Kula K, Labrie F, Lean ME, Pendleton N, Punab M, Silman AJ, Vanderschueren D, Rockwood K, Wu FC, European Male Aging Study Group: Frailty in relation to variations in hormone levels of the hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis in older men: results from the European male aging study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011, 59: 814-821. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03398.x. CrossRefPubMed
Kahn NA, Visscher S, Verheij RA: The quality of the electronic medical records of general practitioners. (report in Dutch - de kwaliteit van het elektronisch patiëntendossier van huisartsen gemeten). 2011, NIVEL: Utrecht
Lamberts HWM: ICPC international classification of primary care. 1987, Oxford: Oxford University Press
WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology: Guidelines for ATC classification and DDD assignment 2011. 2010, Oslo
- Screening for frailty in primary care: a systematic review of the psychometric properties of the frailty index in community-dwelling older people
Mattijs E Numans
Niek J de Wit
Marieke J Schuurmans
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin
Meistgelesene Bücher aus der Inneren Medizin
Mail Icon II