Morita Andrea Akemi, Munhoz Rafaela Furlan, Guzzi Giovana Labegalini, Probst Vanessa Suziane
Stricto Sensu Graduate Program in Rehabilitation Science of State University of Londrina and Pitágoras Unopar University, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.
State University of Londrina, Physiotherapy Department, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.
Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2023 May 11;2023:6660984. doi: 10.1155/2023/6660984. eCollection 2023.
To verify the prevalence of frailty in patients hospitalized with acute exacerbation of COPD; to compare two frailty assessment methods: Edmonton Scale and the Fried Frailty Phenotype, and to associate frailty with functioning in these patients.
Patients hospitalized due to an acute exacerbation of COPD were included. The assessment of pulmonary function, frailty, and functioning was performed. Frailty assessment was performed by the Edmonton Scale and Fried Frailty Phenotype. Individuals were classified into "frail," "pre-frail" and "non-frail." Functioning was evaluated by the one sit-to-stand test.
Thirty-five individuals were included (17 male, 69 ± 9 years; FEV1/FVC 47 ± 10%; FEV1 34 (24-52) % predicted). Participants scored 3 (3-4) points on the Edmonton Scale and 7 (5-9) points on the Fried Frailty Phenotype. According to the Fried model, 17% were considered prefrail and 83% frail and in the Edmonton scale, 20% were classified as nonfrail, 29% prefrail, and 51% frail. There was a positive moderate correlation between the two methods ( = 0.42; =0.011); however, there was no agreement between them (=0.20). This probably occurs because they assess the same construct, i.e., frailty; however, they are different in their components. There was a negative and moderate correlation between the Fried Frailty Phenotype and functioning ( = -0.43; =0.009).
Most hospitalized individuals with exacerbated COPD with severe and very severe airflow limitation are frail and the assessment methods correlate, but there is no agreement. Additionally, there is association between frailty and functioning in this population.
验证慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期住院患者的衰弱患病率；比较两种衰弱评估方法：埃德蒙顿量表和弗里德衰弱表型，并将衰弱与这些患者的功能联系起来。
纳入因慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期住院的患者。进行肺功能、衰弱和功能评估。采用埃德蒙顿量表和弗里德衰弱表型进行衰弱评估。个体被分为“衰弱”、“衰弱前期”和“非衰弱”。通过一次坐立试验评估功能。
纳入35例个体（17例男性，69±9岁；FEV1/FVC为47±10%；FEV1为预测值的34（24 - 52）%）。参与者在埃德蒙顿量表上得分为3（3 - 4）分，在弗里德衰弱表型上得分为7（5 - 9）分。根据弗里德模型，17%被认为是衰弱前期，83%为衰弱；在埃德蒙顿量表中，20%被分类为非衰弱，29%为衰弱前期，51%为衰弱。两种方法之间存在中度正相关（=0.42；=0.011）；然而，它们之间不一致（=0.20）。这可能是因为它们评估的是相同的概念，即衰弱；然而，它们的组成部分不同。弗里德衰弱表型与功能之间存在中度负相关（= - 0.43；=0.009）。
大多数因慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重期住院且有严重和极严重气流受限的个体是衰弱的，评估方法相关，但不一致。此外，该人群中衰弱与功能之间存在关联。
