Clinical and Functional Characterization of Pre-frailty among Elderly Patients Consulting Primary Care Centres

Influence of frailty status on the health-related quality of life in older patients with chronic low back pain: a retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

Understanding the influence of frailty on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in older individuals experiencing chronic low back pain can provide valuable insights into the impact of frailty. Therefore, the aim of our study is to assess how different frailty statuses among older outpatients with chronic low back pain affect their HRQoL.

METHODS

Patients aged 60 and above with chronic low back pain were recruited from March 2022 to February 2023. Frailty was assessed via the frailty phenotype questionnaire, and HRQoL was evaluated using the EQ-5D-5L. Multiple regression models were used to explore the influence of frailty status on the EQ-5D-5L index and EQ-VAS. Logistic regression was used to determine odds ratios for the impact of frailty status on belonging to the lowest EQ-5D-5L index quartile.

RESULTS

A total of 1,054 participants were classified into robust (29.8%), pre-frail (47.7%), and frail (22.5%) groups. Frailty was significantly associated with declining HRQoL. Pre-frail and frail statuses were inversely linked to the EQ-5D-5L index, with significantly higher odds of scoring in the lowest quartile compared to robust individuals. Stratification analysis identified sex as an effect modifier, emphasizing a more substantial association between frailty and the lowest EQ-5D-5L index quartile in female patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant association exists between frailty and reduced HRQoL in patients with chronic low back pain. This association was predominant in female patients. Furthermore, considering the dynamic nature of frailty, early detection and effective interventions targeting pre-frailty are essential to delaying the transition to full frailty and improving HRQoL.

Does depression mediate the pain-frailty relationship? Latent variables approach

Frailty is highly prevalent among older adults. This study aims to add evidence to the mediational role of depression in the pain-frailty relationship. Data came from a sample of 2578 Spanish older adults recruited from the Survey of Health, Aging, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). A set of competing structural equation models were performed: (a) independent prediction, (b) full mediation, and (c) partial mediation. Results showed a better fit for the partial mediation model. This model was extended including covariates. The effects of pain and depression remained relevant in the final model, which explained 91% of the frailty variance. These findings support the relevance of the pain-depression dyad in frailty development. Although the pain shows a direct impact on frailty, this association is partially mediated by depression. The interplay of these conditions could be crucial for treatment effectiveness.

Sex Differences in Frailty Factors and Their Capacity to Identify Frailty in Older Adults Living in Long-Term Nursing Homes

Frailty is a phenomenon that precedes adverse health events in older people. However, there is currently no consensus for how to best measure frailty. Several studies report that women have a higher prevalence of frailty than men, but there is a gap in studies of the high rates of frailty in older people living in long-term nursing homes (LTNHs) stratified by sex. Therefore, we analyzed health parameters related to frailty and measured their capacity to identify frailty stratified by sex in older people living in LTNHs. According to the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP), anxiety increased the risk of frailty in women, while for men functionality protected against the risk of frailty. Regarding the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI), functionality had a protective effect in men, while for women worse dynamic balance indicated a higher risk of frailty. The analyzed parameters had a similar capacity for detecting frailty measured by the TFI in both sexes, while the parameters differed in frailty measured by the FFP. Our study suggests that assessment of frailty in older adults should incorporate a broad definition of frailty that includes not only physical parameters but also psycho-affective aspects as measured by instruments such as the TFI.

Validation of an electronic frailty index with electronic health records: eFRAGICAP index

Objective

To create an electronic frailty index (eFRAGICAP) using electronic health records (EHR) in Catalunya (Spain) and assess its predictive validity with a two-year follow-up of the outcomes: homecare need, institutionalization and mortality in the elderly. Additionally, to assess its concurrent validity compared to other standardized measures: the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and the Risk Instrument for Screening in the Community (RISC).

Methods

The eFRAGICAP was based on the electronic frailty index (eFI) developed in United Kingdom, and includes 36 deficits identified through clinical diagnoses, prescriptions, physical examinations, and questionnaires registered in the EHR of primary health care centres (PHC). All subjects > 65 assigned to a PHC in Barcelona on 1st January, 2016 were included. Subjects were classified according to their eFRAGICAP index as: fit, mild, moderate or severe frailty. Predictive validity was assessed comparing results with the following outcomes: institutionalization, homecare need, and mortality at 24 months. Concurrent validation of the eFRAGICAP was performed with a sample of subjects (n = 333) drawn from the global cohort and the CFS and RISC. Discrimination and calibration measures for the outcomes of institutionalization, homecare need, and mortality and frailty scales were calculated.

Results

253,684 subjects had their eFRAGICAP index calculated. Mean age was 76.3 years (59.5% women). Of these, 41.1% were classified as fit, and 32.2% as presenting mild, 18.7% moderate, and 7.9% severe frailty. The mean age of the subjects included in the validation subsample (n = 333) was 79.9 years (57.7% women). Of these, 12.6% were classified as fit, and 31.5% presented mild, 39.6% moderate, and 16.2% severe frailty. Regarding the outcome analyses, the eFRAGICAP was good in the detection of subjects who were institutionalized, required homecare assistance, or died at 24 months (c-statistic of 0.841, 0.853, and 0.803, respectively). eFRAGICAP was also good in the detection of frail subjects compared to the CFS (AUC 0.821) and the RISC (AUC 0.848).

Conclusion

The eFRAGICAP has a good discriminative capacity to identify frail subjects compared to other frailty scales and predictive outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03090-8.

Mortality, falls and fracture risk are positively associated with frailty: a SIDIAP cohort study of 890,000 patients

Background

Frail subjects are at increased risk of adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess their risk of falls, all-cause mortality, and fractures.

Method

We used a retrospective cohort study using the Sistema d’Informació per al Desenvolupament de l’Investigació en Atenció Primària database (>6 million residents). Subjects aged 75 years and older with ≥1 year of valid data (2007–2015) were included. Follow-up was carried out from (the latest of) the date of cohort entry up to migration, end of the study period or outcome (whichever came first). The eFRAGICAP classified subjects as fit, mild, moderate, or severely frail. Outcomes (10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases) were incident falls, fractures (overall/hip/vertebral), and all-cause mortality during the study period. Statistics: hazard ratios (HRs), 95% CI adjusted (per age, sex, and socioeconomic status), and unadjusted cause-specific Cox models, accounting for competing risk of death (fit group as the reference).

Results

A total of 893 211 subjects were analyzed; 54.4% were classified as fit, 34.0% as mild, 9.9% as moderate, and 1.6% as severely frail. Compared with the fit, frail had an increased risk of falls (adjusted HR [95% CI] of 1.55 [1.52–1.58], 2.74 [2.66–2.84], and 5.94 [5.52–6.40]), all-cause mortality (adjusted HR [95% CI] of 1.36 [1.35–1.37], 2.19 [2.16–2.23], and 4.29 [4.13–4.45]), and fractures (adjusted HR [95% CI] of 1.21 [1.20–1.23], 1.51 [1.47–1.55], and 2.36 [2.20–2.53]) for mild, moderate, and severe frailty, respectively. Severely frail had a high risk of vertebral (HR of 2.49 [1.99–3.11]) and hip fracture (HR [95% CI] of 1.85 [1.50–2.28]). Accounting for competing risk of death did not change results.

Conclusion

Frail subjects are at increased risk of death, fractures, and falls. The eFRAGICAP tool can easily assess frailty in electronic primary care databases in Spain.

Prefrailty in older adults: A concept analysis

BACKGROUND

The concept of prefrailty lacks clarity. Often, prefrailty is defined in relation to frailty and less often as a distinct concept. Theoretical evidence for prefrailty is minimal unlike frailty, which has been examined for decades although consensus about how to measure frailty has not been achieved.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to conduct a concept analysis of prefrailty to provide greater understanding of this phenomenon in the context of older adults.

DESIGN

Rodgers and Knafl's evolutionary concept analysis approach.

DATA SOURCES

The literature search for the concept analysis was conducted as follows: three databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Abstracts in Social Gerontology databases) were searched using carefully selected search terms; and grey literature was not included.

REVIEW METHODS

In phase one, we used the search strategy and search terms to narrow the search for relevant articles. We selected articles that met the following inclusion criteria: (1) how prefrailty was conceptualized; (2) how prefrailty was measured; and (3) interventions targeted towards prefrailty. In phase two, we extracted data from included articles. In phase three, we analyzed data using thematic analysis and findings were presented as attributes, antecedents, consequences, and related concepts of prefrailty. One example of prefrailty in older adults was presented to highlight the concept in praxis. In phase four, methodological and substantive area experts reviewed and contributed to discussion and interpretation of findings including disciplinary perspectives of prefrailty.

RESULTS

A total of 41 articles were included for synthesis. The attributes of prefrailty were predisposing in nature, non-specific, multidimensional, and cumulative in effects. Antecedents of prefrailty were categorized into the following domains: sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidity, behaviours, and laboratory/clinical markers. Consequences of prefrailty were separated into two themes: increased risk of adverse outcomes and advancing levels of frailty. Surrogate and related terms (noted in the literature) that had shared attributes with prefrailty were increased vulnerability, transitional stage, dynamic process, progressive process with latent phase, and physical frailty.

CONCLUSIONS

As a result of conducting this concept analysis, we found that prefrailty was defined as a clinically silent process that predisposes individuals to frailty. Prefrailty, as a concept, was derived from the Fried's operational definition for frailty. Attributes, antecedents, consequences, and related terms will help clinicians consider how prefrailty presents in older adults separate from frailty. Further research is needed to build upon our understanding from this concept analysis. Tweetable Abstract: Prefrailty is unclear as a concept - Research on sociodemographic characteristics of older adults living with frailty will help clarify.

Frailty and Multimorbidity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity and frailty are complex syndromes characteristics of aging. We reviewed the literature and provided pooled estimations of any evidence regarding (a) the coexistence of frailty and multimorbidity and (b) their association.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Web of Science for relevant articles up to September 2017. Pooled estimates were obtained through random effect models and Mantel-Haenszel weighting. Homogeneity (I2), risk of bias, and publication bias were assessed. PROSPERO registration: 57890.

RESULTS

A total of 48 studies involving 78,122 participants were selected, and 25 studies were included in one or more meta-analyses. Forty-five studies were cross-sectional and 3 longitudinal, with the majority of them including community-dwelling participants (n = 35). Forty-three studies presented a moderate risk of bias and five a low risk. Most of the articles defined multimorbidity as having two or more diseases and frailty according to the Cardiovascular Health Study criteria. In meta-analyses, the prevalence of multimorbidity in frail individual was 72% (95% confidence interval = 63%-81%; I2 = 91.3%), and the prevalence of frailty among multimorbid individuals was 16% (95% confidence interval = 12%-21%; I2 = 96.5%). Multimorbidity was associated with frailty in pooled analyses (odds ratio = 2.27; 95% confidence interval = 1.97-2.62; I2 = 47.7%). The three longitudinal studies suggest a bidirectional association between multimorbidity and frailty.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty and multimorbidity are two related conditions in older adults. Most frail individuals are also multimorbid, but fewer multimorbid ones also present frailty. Our findings are not conclusive regarding the causal association between the two conditions. Further longitudinal and well-designed studies may help to untangle the relationship between frailty and multimorbidity.

Factors Associated with Frailty Syndrome in Older Adults

OBJECTIVE

Frailty is a common geriatric syndrome, characterized by a decrease in energy reserve and stress resistance, resulting in an accumulated decline of multiple physiological systems and greater vulnerability. Frailty syndrome has a multifactorial etiology involving a biological basis associated with sociobehavioral factors. We verify the association of frailty syndrome with family functionality level, nutritional status and medication adherence in older adults.

DESIGN

Observational and analytical study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Conducted at ambulatory the university hospital, with patients aged 60 years or older.

MEASUREMENTS

Cognitive function was measured using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); nutritional status was evaluated using the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) and Body Mass Index, BMI; the 5-item FRAIL scale was used for frailty screening; family functioning was assessed using the Family APGAR Index, which evaluates Adaptability, Partnership, Growth, Affection, and Resolve; Self-reported medication adherence was measured by the eight-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8).

RESULTS

The study involved 308 older adults, with a mean age of 70.40 years, There was an association between frailty and highly dysfunctional family with an OR of 5.9 (95% CI 1.9-18.5)(p<0.05), nutritional risk assessed by BMI, where low weight presented an OR of 2.5 (95% CI 1.1-5.8) and obesity an OR of 2.8 (95% CI 1.1-7.0)(P <0.05) and a nutritional risk assessed by MNA with an OR 6.3(95% CI 1.9-20.4) and low medication adherence with an OR of 8.9 (95% CI, 3.6-21.6)(P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Frailty syndrome is associated with high levels of family dysfunction, nutritional risk and poor medication adherence amongst older people.

Chronic Pain and Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to examine the relationship between chronic pain and frailty in community-dwelling older adults.

DESIGN

A systematic review method following the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2015.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Plus, Science Direct, Scielo, LILACS, and the Joanna Briggs Institute database of systematic reviews and implementation reports were searched using different combinations of the terms "frail," "frailty," and "pain."

REVIEW/ANALYSIS METHODS

Original publications of nononcologic chronic pain and frailty status in community-dwelling older adults published in English or Spanish were included. Because of the heterogeneity of the studies, a narrative approach was used to summarize the results.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies were finally selected for the systematic review. Most of them (n = 14) were cross-sectional studies, and there were also longitudinal studies (n = 4), cohort studies (n = 3), and randomized controlled trials (n = 2). Most of the studies found an association between chronic pain and frailty in terms of prevalence; approximately 45% of frail patients had chronic pain, and prevalence can reach 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

The studies analyzed suggest that chronic pain has a predictive effect for frailty in older adults compared with those reporting no pain. Higher pain intensity, chronic widespread pain, and higher pain interference were also related to frailty status. No specific interventions for managing chronic pain in frail or prefrail older adults were found.

The Impact of Movement Behaviors on Bone Health in Elderly with Adequate Nutritional Status: Compositional Data Analysis Depending on the Frailty Status

The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between bone mass (BM) and physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) according to frailty status and sex using compositional data analysis. We analyzed 871 older people with an adequate nutritional status. Fried criteria were used to classify by frailty status. Time spent in SB, light intensity PA (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA (MVPA) was assessed from accelerometry for 7 days. BM was determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The combined effect of PA and SB was significantly associated with BM in robust men and women (p ≤ 0.05). In relation to the other behaviors, SB was negatively associated with BM in robust men while BM was positively associated with SB and negatively with LPA and MVPA in robust women. Moreover, LPA also was positively associated with arm BM (p ≤ 0.01). Finally, in pre-frail women, BM was positively associated with MVPA. In our sample, to decrease SB could be a good strategy to improve BM in robust men. In contrast, in pre-frail women, MVPA may be an important factor to consider regarding bone health.

Association of polypharmacy and hyperpolypharmacy with frailty states: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate: (1) the cross-sectional association between polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy and presence of prefrailty or frailty; (2) the risk of incident prefrailty or frailty in persons with polypharmacy, and vice versa.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase from 01/01/1998 to 5/2/2018. Pooled estimates were obtained through random effect models and Mantel-Haenszel weighting. Homogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic and publication bias with Egger's and Begg's tests.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included. The pooled proportion of polypharmacy in persons with prefrailty and frailty was 47% (95% CI 33-61) and 59% (95% CI 42-76), respectively. Increased odds ratio of polypharmacy were seen for prefrail (pooled OR = 1.52; 95% CI 1.32-1.79) and frail persons (pooled OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.81-3.79). Hyperpolypharmacy was also increased in prefrail (OR = 1.95; 95% CI 1.41-2.70) and frail (OR = 6.57; 95% CI 9.57-10.48) persons compared to robust persons. Only seven longitudinal studies reported data on the risk of either incident prefrailty or frailty in persons with baseline polypharmacy. A significant higher odds of developing prefrailty was found in robust persons with polypharmacy (pooled OR = 1.30; 95% CI 1.12-1.51). We found no papers investigating polypharmacy incidence in persons with prefrailty/frailty.

CONCLUSIONS

Polypharmacy is common in prefrail and frail persons, and these individuals are also more likely to be on extreme drug regimens, i.e. hyperpolypharmacy, than robust older persons. More research is needed to investigate the causal relationship between polypharmacy and frailty syndromes, thereby identifying ways to jointly reduce drug burden and prefrailty/frailty in these individuals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018104756.