Department of Health Care and Nursing Science, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
BMC Public Health. 2010 Mar 31;10:176. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-176.
Frailty is highly prevalent in older people. Its serious adverse consequences, such as disability, are considered to be a public health problem. Therefore, disability prevention in community-dwelling frail older people is considered to be a priority for research and clinical practice in geriatric care. With regard to disability prevention, valid screening instruments are needed to identify frail older people in time. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the psychometric properties of three screening instruments: the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) and the Sherbrooke Postal Questionnaire (SPQ). For validation purposes the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) was added.
A questionnaire was sent to 687 community-dwelling older people (> or = 70 years). Agreement between instruments, internal consistency, and construct validity of instruments were evaluated and compared.
The response rate was 77%. Prevalence estimates of frailty ranged from 40% to 59%. The highest agreement was found between the GFI and the TFI (Cohen's kappa = 0.74). Cronbach's alpha for the GFI, the TFI and the SPQ was 0.73, 0.79 and 0.26, respectively. Scores on the three instruments correlated significantly with each other (GFI - TFI, r = 0.87; GFI - SPQ, r = 0.47; TFI - SPQ, r = 0.42) and with the GARS (GFI - GARS, r = 0.57; TFI - GARS, r = 0.61; SPQ - GARS, r = 0.46). The GFI and the TFI scores were, as expected, significantly related to age, sex, education and income.
The GFI and the TFI showed high internal consistency and construct validity in contrast to the SPQ. Based on these findings it is not yet possible to conclude whether the GFI or the TFI should be preferred; data on the predictive values of both instruments are needed. The SPQ seems less appropriate for postal screening of frailty among community-dwelling older people.
衰弱在老年人中非常普遍。其严重的不良后果,如残疾,被认为是一个公共卫生问题。因此,社区居住的虚弱老年人的残疾预防被认为是老年护理研究和临床实践的优先事项。关于残疾预防,需要有效的筛选工具来及时识别虚弱的老年人。本研究旨在评估和比较三种筛选工具的心理测量特性:格罗宁根衰弱指标(GFI)、蒂尔堡衰弱指标(TFI)和谢布鲁克邮政问卷(SPQ)。为了验证目的,加入了格罗宁根活动限制量表(GARS)。
向 687 名(>=70 岁)社区居住的老年人发送了一份问卷。评估和比较了仪器之间的一致性、内部一致性和结构有效性。
应答率为 77%。虚弱的患病率估计值在 40%至 59%之间。GFI 和 TFI 之间的一致性最高(Cohen's kappa=0.74)。GFI、TFI 和 SPQ 的 Cronbach's alpha 分别为 0.73、0.79 和 0.26。三个仪器的得分相互之间显著相关(GFI-TFI,r=0.87;GFI-SPQ,r=0.47;TFI-SPQ,r=0.42),与 GARS 相关(GFI-GARS,r=0.57;TFI-GARS,r=0.61;SPQ-GARS,r=0.46)。GFI 和 TFI 的分数与年龄、性别、教育程度和收入呈显著相关。
GFI 和 TFI 表现出较高的内部一致性和结构有效性,而 SPQ 则相反。基于这些发现,尚不能确定应该优先选择 GFI 还是 TFI;需要两种仪器的预测值数据。SPQ 似乎不太适合社区居住的老年人的衰弱邮政筛查。