Conclusions The TFI has the most robust evidence of reliability and validity and has been the most extensively examined in terms of psychometric properties .
However , there is insufficient evidence at present to determine the best tool for use in research and clinical practice .
Background Frailty is widely recognised as a distinct multifactorial clinical syndrome that implies vulnerability .
The links between frailty and adverse outcomes such as death and institutionalisation have been widely evidence d. There is currently no gold st and ard frailty assessment tool ; optimizing the assessment of frailty in older people therefore remains a research priority .
The objective of this systematic review is to identify existing multi-component frailty assessment tools that were specifically developed to assess frailty in adults aged ≥60 years old and to systematic ally and critically evaluate the reliability and validity of these tools .
Development of an easy prognostic score for frailty outcomes in the aged.
BACKGROUND identification of frailty is recommended in geriatric practice . However , there is a lack of frailty scores combining easy-to-collect predictors from multiple domains . OBJECTIVE to develop a frailty score including only self-reported information and easy-to-perform st and ardised measurements recommended in routine geriatric practice . DESIGN prospect i ve population -based study . SETTING / PARTICIPANTS included 1,007 Italian subjects aged 65 and over . MEASUREMENTS seventeen baseline possible mortality predictors from several domains , 4-year risk of mortality and other adverse health outcomes associated with frailty [ fractures , hospitalisation , and new and worsening activities of daily living ( ADL ) disability ] . METHODS a multivariate Cox model was used to identify the best sub-group of independent predictors and to develop a mortality prognostic score , defined as the number of adverse predictors present . Logistic regression was used to verify whether the score also predicted risk of other frailty outcomes in the cohort survivors . RESULTS nine independent mortality predictors were identified . Among subjects with score > or =3 , each one point increase in the score was associated with a doubling in mortality risk and , among survivors , with an increased risk of all the other adverse health outcomes . CONCLUSIONS nine easy-to-collect predictors may identify aged people at increased risk of adverse health outcomes associated with frailty
Conclusions The TFI has the most robust evidence of reliability and validity and has been the most extensively examined in terms of psychometric properties .
However , there is insufficient evidence at present to determine the best tool for use in research and clinical practice .
Background Frailty is widely recognised as a distinct multifactorial clinical syndrome that implies vulnerability .
The links between frailty and adverse outcomes such as death and institutionalisation have been widely evidence d. There is currently no gold st and ard frailty assessment tool ; optimizing the assessment of frailty in older people therefore remains a research priority .
The objective of this systematic review is to identify existing multi-component frailty assessment tools that were specifically developed to assess frailty in adults aged ≥60 years old and to systematic ally and critically evaluate the reliability and validity of these tools .