• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[衰弱老年人的评估工具:文献综述。]

[Assessment instruments for frail elders: a literature review.].

作者信息

Strini Veronica, Schiavolin Roberta

出版信息

Assist Inferm Ric. 2019 Apr-Jun;38(2):87-98. doi: 10.1702/3169.31501.

DOI:10.1702/3169.31501
PMID:31241055
Abstract

UNLABELLED

. Assessment instruments for frail elders: a literature review.

INTRODUCTION

The frail patient is a usually elderly person, chronically affected by multiple illnesses, with an unstable and frequently disabled state of health, whose care needs are determined by factors linked to clinical conditions, socio-family status, environment, accessibility to care. The evaluation of frailty, allows the development of care plans aimed at the real needs of the patient.

AIMS

Identify the tools for assessing frailty in the elderly based on information collected by nurses.

METHODS

Use of the databases Pubmed, CINAHL and COCHRANE, with the mesh terms "frailty, weights and measures, scale". Age limits (65+ years) and language (English and Italian) were set and the references of the selected articles were analyzed. The items of each tool were classified by domain (cognitive, psychological, physical and social). The main characteristics of each instrument were studied, assessing their potential use in nursing care, both of the original scale and of any modified versions.

RESULTS

From the 115 selected articles, 13 frailty assessment tools were identified. The tools were classified as one and multidimensional. The one-dimensional instruments are oriented to the physical domain of functioning and biological / physiological state, while multidimensional evaluations are based on the analysis of the interactions of the physical, psychological and social domains of human functioning.

CONCLUSION

There is no standard and internationally agreed on measure for assessing frailty; some measurements are more adequate for screening frailty at the community level, others for a hospital context.

摘要

未标注

老年体弱患者评估工具:文献综述

引言

体弱患者通常为老年人,长期受多种疾病影响,健康状况不稳定且常伴有残疾,其护理需求由临床状况、社会家庭状况、环境、医疗可及性等因素决定。对体弱程度的评估有助于制定针对患者实际需求的护理计划。

目的

基于护士收集的信息,确定评估老年人虚弱程度的工具。

方法

使用PubMed、CINAHL和Cochrane数据库,检索词为“虚弱、体重与测量、量表”。设定年龄限制(65岁及以上)和语言(英语和意大利语),并分析所选文章的参考文献。每个工具的项目按领域(认知、心理、身体和社会)分类。研究每个工具的主要特征,评估其在护理中的潜在用途,包括原始量表及其任何修改版本。

结果

从115篇所选文章中,确定了13种虚弱评估工具。这些工具分为一维和多维。一维工具侧重于功能的身体领域和生物/生理状态,而多维评估基于对人类功能的身体、心理和社会领域相互作用的分析。

结论

目前尚无评估虚弱程度的标准且国际公认的测量方法;一些测量方法更适合在社区层面筛查虚弱,另一些则适用于医院环境。

相似文献

1
[Assessment instruments for frail elders: a literature review.].[衰弱老年人的评估工具:文献综述。]
Assist Inferm Ric. 2019 Apr-Jun;38(2):87-98. doi: 10.1702/3169.31501.
2
Frailty Screening in the Community Using the FRAIL Scale.社区中使用 FRAIL 量表进行虚弱筛查。
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015 May 1;16(5):412-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.01.087. Epub 2015 Feb 24.
3
Predictive performance of four frailty screening tools in community-dwelling elderly.四种衰弱筛查工具在社区居住老年人中的预测性能。
BMC Geriatr. 2017 Nov 10;17(1):262. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0633-y.
4
Simultaneous Employment of the FRAIL Scale and the Tilburg Frailty Indicator May Identify Elderly People Who Require Different Interventional Strategies.同时使用 FRAIL 量表和 Tilburg 衰弱指数可以识别需要不同干预策略的老年人。
Clin Interv Aging. 2020 May 19;15:683-690. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S250437. eCollection 2020.
5
Outcome instruments to measure frailty: a systematic review.用于测量虚弱的结局指标:系统评价。
Ageing Res Rev. 2011 Jan;10(1):104-14. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2010.09.001. Epub 2010 Sep 17.
6
Feasibility and acceptability of commonly used screening instruments to identify frailty among community-dwelling older people: a mixed methods study.社区居住老年人中常用筛查工具识别虚弱的可行性和可接受性:一项混合方法研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Apr 22;20(1):152. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01551-6.
7
Exploring the efficiency of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator: a review.探索蒂尔堡衰弱指标的有效性:一项综述
Clin Interv Aging. 2017 Oct 19;12:1739-1752. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S130686. eCollection 2017.
8
A comparison between uni- and multidimensional frailty measures: prevalence, functional status, and relationships with disability.单维度与多维度衰弱测量方法的比较:患病率、功能状态以及与残疾的关系。
Clin Interv Aging. 2015 Oct 22;10:1669-78. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S92328. eCollection 2015.
9
The Korean version of the FRAIL scale: clinical feasibility and validity of assessing the frailty status of Korean elderly.FRAIL量表的韩文版本:评估韩国老年人衰弱状态的临床可行性和有效性。
Korean J Intern Med. 2016 May;31(3):594-600. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2014.331. Epub 2015 Dec 23.
10
German translation, cross-cultural adaptation and diagnostic test accuracy of three frailty screening tools : PRISMA-7, FRAIL scale and Groningen Frailty Indicator.三种衰弱筛查工具的德语翻译、跨文化调适及诊断测试准确性:PRISMA-7、衰弱量表和格罗宁根衰弱指标
Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2018 Apr;51(3):282-292. doi: 10.1007/s00391-017-1295-2. Epub 2017 Aug 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Usefulness of the Edmonton Frail Scale in Assessing the Impact of Heart Failure on Frailty.埃德蒙顿虚弱量表在评估心力衰竭对虚弱影响中的作用。
In Vivo. 2023 Jul-Aug;37(4):1857-1866. doi: 10.21873/invivo.13277.
2
The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) employment in the frailty assessment of patients suffering from Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs): A systematic review.临床衰弱量表(CFS)在非传染性疾病(NCDs)患者衰弱评估中的应用:一项系统综述。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Aug 16;9:967952. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.967952. eCollection 2022.
3
Cognitive impairment, frailty and rehabilitation outcome in older cardiorespiratory patients. DEC_FRAinRIAB: Study protocol.
老年心肺疾病患者认知障碍、衰弱与康复结局。DEC_FRAinRIAB 研究方案。
PLoS One. 2022 Aug 4;17(8):e0272132. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272132. eCollection 2022.
4
Efficient and rapid assessment of multiple aspects of frailty using the Kyoto Frailty Scale, developed from the Edmonton Frail Scale.使用从埃德蒙顿衰弱量表发展而来的京都衰弱量表,对衰弱的多个方面进行高效快速评估。
J Phys Ther Sci. 2021 Mar;33(3):267-273. doi: 10.1589/jpts.33.267. Epub 2021 Mar 17.