Perna Simone, Francis Matthew D'Arcy, Bologna Chiara, Moncaglieri Francesca, Riva Antonella, Morazzoni Paolo, Allegrini Pietro, Isu Antonio, Vigo Beatrice, Guerriero Fabio, Rondanelli Mariangela
Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, Section of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Pavia, Azienda di Servizi alla Persona di Pavia, Via Emilia 12, Pavia, Italy.
Deprtment of Internal Medicine and Medical Therapy, Section of Geriatrics University of Pavia, Azienda di Servizi alla Persona, Pavia, Italy.
BMC Geriatr. 2017 Jan 4;17(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0382-3.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) on frailty assessment in association with multi-dimensional conditions assessed with specific screening tools and to explore the prevalence of frailty by gender.
We enrolled 366 hospitalised patients (women\men: 251\115), mean age 81.5 years. The EFS was given to the patients to evaluate their frailty. Then we collected data concerning cognitive status through Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), health status (evaluated with the number of diseases), functional independence (Barthel Index and Activities Daily Living; BI, ADL, IADL), use of drugs (counting of drugs taken every day), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Skeletal Muscle Index of sarcopenia (SMI), osteoporosis and functionality (Handgrip strength).
According with the EFS, the 19.7% of subjects were classified as non frail, 66.4% as apparently vulnerable and 13.9% with severe frailty. The EFS scores were associated with cognition (MMSE: β = 0.980; p < 0.01), functional independence (ADL: β = -0.512; p < 0.00); (IADL: β = -0.338; p < 0.01); use of medications (β = 0.110; p < 0.01); nutrition (MNA: β = -0.413; p < 0.01); mood (GDS: β = -0.324; p < 0.01); functional performance (Handgrip: β = -0.114, p < 0.01) (BI: β = -0.037; p < 0.01), but not with number of comorbidities (β = 0.108; p = 0.052). In osteoporotic patients versus not-osteoporotic patients the mean EFS score did not differ between groups (women: p = 0.365; men: p = 0.088), whereas in Sarcopenic versus not-Sarcopenic patients, there was a significant differences in women: p < 0.05.
This study suggests that measuring frailty with EFS is helpful and performance tool for stratifying the state of fragility in a group of institutionalized elderly. As matter of facts the EFS has been shown to be associated with several geriatric conditions such independence, drugs assumption, mood, mental, functional and nutritional status.
本研究旨在评估埃德蒙顿虚弱量表(EFS)在与使用特定筛查工具评估的多维状况相关的虚弱评估中的表现,并按性别探讨虚弱的患病率。
我们招募了366名住院患者(女性/男性:251/115),平均年龄81.5岁。对患者进行EFS评估以评估其虚弱程度。然后我们通过简易精神状态检查表(MMSE)收集有关认知状态的数据、健康状况(根据疾病数量评估)、功能独立性(巴氏指数和日常生活活动能力;BI、ADL、IADL)、药物使用情况(计算每日服用的药物数量)、微型营养评定法(MNA)、老年抑郁量表(GDS)、肌肉减少症的骨骼肌指数(SMI)、骨质疏松症和功能(握力)。
根据EFS,19.7%的受试者被分类为非虚弱,66.4%为明显脆弱,13.9%为严重虚弱。EFS评分与认知(MMSE:β = 0.980;p < 0.01)、功能独立性(ADL:β = -0.512;p < 0.00);(IADL:β = -0.338;p < 0.01);药物使用(β = 0.110;p < 0.01);营养(MNA:β = -0.413;p < 0.01);情绪(GDS:β = -0.324;p < 0.01);功能表现(握力:β = -0.114,p < 0.01)(BI:β = -0.037;p < 0.01)相关,但与合并症数量无关(β = 0.108;p = 0.052)。在骨质疏松症患者与非骨质疏松症患者中,两组之间的平均EFS评分无差异(女性:p = 0.365;男性:p = 0.088),而在肌肉减少症患者与非肌肉减少症患者中,女性存在显著差异:p < 0.05。
本研究表明,使用EFS测量虚弱对于对一组机构化老年人的脆弱状态进行分层是一种有用的工具。事实上,EFS已被证明与多种老年疾病相关,如独立性、药物服用、情绪、心理、功能和营养状况。