Suppr超能文献

临床实践中的衰弱评估:老年门诊中不同身体衰弱评估方法的比较。

Measuring frailty in clinical practice: a comparison of physical frailty assessment methods in a geriatric out-patient clinic.

机构信息

Geriatric Education and Research for the Aging Sciences (GERAS), St Peter's Hospital, 88 Maplewood Ave, Hamilton, ON, L8M 1W9, Canada.

Department of Kinesiology and Interdisciplinary Science, McMaster University, 1280 Main St West, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Geriatr. 2017 Nov 13;17(1):264. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0623-0.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this study were to determine: 1) the prevalence of frailty using Fried's phenotype method and the Short Performance Physical Battery (SPPB), 2) agreement between frailty assessment methods, 3) the feasibility of assessing frailty using Fried's phenotype method and the SPPB.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted at a geriatric out-patient clinic in Hamilton, Canada. A research assistant conducted all frailty assessments. Patients were classified as non-frail, pre-frail or frail according to Fried's phenotype method and the SPPB. Agreement among methods is reported using the Cohen kappa statistic (standard error). Feasibility data included the percent of eligible participants agreeing to attempt the frailty assessments (criterion for feasibility: ≥90% of patients agreeing to the frailty assessment), equipment required, and safety considerations. A p-value of <0.05 is considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 110 participants (92%) and 109 participants (91%) agreed to attempt Fried's phenotype method and SPPB, respectively. No adverse events occurred during any assessments. According to Fried's phenotype method, the prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty was 35% and 56%, respectively, and according to the SPPB, the prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty was 50% and 35%, respectively. There was fair to moderate agreement between methods for determining which participants were frail (0.488 [0.082], p < 0.001) and pre-frail (0.272 [0.084], p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty and pre-frailty are common in this geriatric outpatient population, and there is fair to moderate agreement between Fried's phenotype method and the SPPB. Over 90% of the patients who were eligible for the study agreed to attempt the frailty assessments, demonstrating that according to our feasibility criteria, frailty can be assessed in this patient population. Assessing frailty may help clinicians identify high-risk patients and tailor interventions based on baseline frailty characteristics.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在确定:1)采用 Fried 表型法和短程体能表现电池(SPPB)评估衰弱的患病率;2)不同评估方法的一致性;3)采用 Fried 表型法和 SPPB 评估衰弱的可行性。

方法

本横断面研究在加拿大汉密尔顿的老年门诊诊所进行。一名研究助理对所有衰弱进行评估。患者根据 Fried 表型法和 SPPB 分为非衰弱、衰弱前期和衰弱。方法间的一致性采用 Cohen kappa 统计量(标准误)表示。可行性数据包括符合条件的参与者同意尝试进行衰弱评估的百分比(可行性标准:≥90%的患者同意进行衰弱评估)、所需设备和安全性考虑。p 值<0.05 为差异有统计学意义。

结果

共有 110 名参与者(92%)和 109 名参与者(91%)分别同意尝试 Fried 表型法和 SPPB。任何评估过程中均未发生不良事件。根据 Fried 表型法,衰弱和衰弱前期的患病率分别为 35%和 56%,根据 SPPB,衰弱和衰弱前期的患病率分别为 50%和 35%。两种方法确定衰弱患者(0.488 [0.082],p<0.001)和衰弱前期患者(0.272 [0.084],p=0.002)的一致性为中等到适度。

结论

在本老年门诊人群中,衰弱和衰弱前期很常见,且 Fried 表型法和 SPPB 之间具有中等到适度的一致性。超过 90%的符合条件的患者同意尝试进行衰弱评估,表明根据我们的可行性标准,可在该患者人群中进行衰弱评估。评估衰弱可帮助临床医生识别高危患者,并根据基线衰弱特征定制干预措施。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5653/5683585/947d9714cc5e/12877_2017_623_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验