北京市社区老年人跌倒发生与衰弱的相关性研究

目的 了解北京市社区老年人的衰弱状况,并分析跌倒发生及发生次数与衰弱状况的相关性。方法 2015年11月至2016年1月采用分层整群抽样的方法对北京市东城区（原崇文区）龙潭街道办事处所管辖社区≥60岁老年人,以面对面询问方式入户调查,应用衰弱指数（FI）评价老年人的衰弱状况,采用多因素logistic分析老年人跌倒与衰弱的相关性。结果 共调查1 557名老年人,跌倒发生率为17.8%（277/1 557）,其中女性跌倒发生率（21.0%,192/277）高于男性（13.3%,85/277）（χ²=15.288,P=0.000）。老年人FI值中位数（四分位间距）为0.09（0.08）,其中女性［0.10（0.08）］明显高于男性［0.08（0.07）］,Z=5.376,P=0.000。277名跌倒者FI值中位数（四分位间距）为0.12（0.11）,明显高于1 280名非跌倒老年人［0.08（0.07）］,Z=7.501,P=0.000。多因素logistic回归分析显示,老年人FI值越大,跌倒发生及其次数增加的风险越大（分别OR=1.093、2.234）;相比于年龄、性别等其他因素,FI值对跌倒发生及跌倒次数增加的风险影响最大。结论 北京市社区老年人跌倒的发生与衰弱状况密切相关,在预防跌倒时更应关注衰弱程度高的老年人。     

基于衰弱指数评估的老年人衰弱状况与死亡风险的相关性分析

目的 分析基于衰弱指数（FI）评估的老年人衰弱状况与死亡风险的相关性。方法 以北京市城市社区老年人健康状况及跌倒情况随访调查数据库中2005年基线调查人群作为本研究的分析样本,以2015年随访调查中收集该队列人群的死亡情况作为结局变量进行分析。采用FI模型对老年人进行衰弱评估,分析不同年龄组老年人FI与死亡率的关系;采用Cox回归模型评估FI对不同年龄组老年人死亡风险的影响,应用Kaplan-Meier法绘制不同衰弱程度老年人的生存曲线。结果 最终纳入分析的1 301例老年人,至2015年共死亡403例,死亡率为31.0%（403/1 301）。老年人死亡率随着FI的增加而增加,且随着FI值的增加死亡率增加的速度减缓,老年人FI值所致死亡存在极限值约0.70,在此基础上任何新增加的健康缺陷均可能导致老年人死亡。多因素Cox回归结果显示,FI值增加会增加老年人死亡的风险（HR=1.143,95% CI：1.034～1.248,P=0.000）,且FI值相比于年龄对死亡风险的预测价值更高（HR=1.143比HR=1.048,t=5.827,P=0.000）。随年龄增加,FI值即老年人衰弱对死亡风险影响的HR值从1.179降至1.120,即衰弱对死亡的影响也逐渐降低。生存曲线结果显示,各年龄组老年人的生存率均随衰弱程度的增加而降低（Log-rank=317.812、354.203、247.258,均P=0.000）;对不同衰弱程度进行两两比较结果显示,仅≥80岁组高龄老年人衰弱程度较高组（0.4≤FI<0.5、FI≥0.5）生存率比较差异无统计学意义（P=0.368）。结论 采用FI模型对北京市城市社区老年人进行衰弱评估能够较好地反映老年人的衰弱特征,在预测不良健康预后如死亡率方面具有较高的敏感性;在对老年人进行衰弱的干预时,着重于衰弱程度较低或相对年轻的老年人可能更有效地减少衰弱所导致的不良结局。     

中国8个长寿地区65岁及以上老年人血尿素氮与肌酐比值和衰弱的关联

目的 探讨中国8个长寿地区≥65岁老年人血尿素氮与肌酐比值和衰弱的关联。方法 研究对象来自老年健康生物标志物队列,利用血尿素氮与肌酐的基线信息和随访获得的衰弱事件,将血尿素氮与肌酐比值按五分位数分组,采用Cox比例风险回归模型分析血尿素氮与肌酐比值和衰弱发生风险的关联。结果 共纳入1 562名研究对象,年龄（81.0±17.0）岁,其中男性814名（52.1%）。（3.73±1.43）年随访期间共发生衰弱事件258名。Cox比例风险回归模型分析结果显示,在调整相关的混杂因素后,与血尿素氮与肌酐比值Q₁组相比,Q₃、Q₄和Q₅组的衰弱发生风险分别降低了36%［风险比（HR）=0.64,95%CI：0.43~0.94］、44%（HR=0.56,95%CI：0.38~0.84）和40%（HR=0.60,95%CI：0.41~0.88）。血尿素氮与肌酐比值每增加一个标准差,衰弱发生风险降低20%（HR=0.80,95%CI：0.70~0.91）。血尿素氮与肌酐比值和衰弱发生风险呈近线性剂量-反应关系。结论 衰弱发生风险随着血尿素氮与肌酐比值的增加而呈下降趋势,维持较高的血尿素氮与肌酐比值对于预防老年人衰弱具有重要意义。     

老年居民抑郁与情绪调节策略的相关性研究

目的 探讨银川市老年居民抑郁与情绪调节策略的现况及两者的关系。方法 2016年3-5月选择银川市5所养老机构505名老年人及5个社区的538名老年人,共1 043名。抑郁调查采用老年抑郁量表（GDS）,情绪调节策略调查采用Gross情绪调节问卷和反刍思维量表。结果 银川市老年居民抑郁发生率为32.0%,其中社区老年人为35.5%,养老机构老年人为28.3%,差异有统计学意义（χ²=6.187,P<0.05）。经倾向值匹配分析法分析,社区老年人和养老机构老年人抑郁发生率差异无统计学意义（χ²=0.066,P=0.798）。1 043名老年居民GDS得分为（9.1±5.7）分,老年人认知重评得分为（26.7±8.0）分,表达抑制得分为（16.3±6.6）分,反刍思维得分为（34.5±11.7）分。不同性别、兴趣爱好、体育锻炼的老年人认知重评得分差异有统计学意义（均P<0.05）;不同文化程度、经济收入的老年人表达抑制得分差异有统计学意义（均P<0.05）;不同年龄、婚姻状况、文化程度、兴趣爱好的老年人反刍思维得分差异有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。抑郁得分与认知重评负相关（r=-0.400,P<0.01）、与反刍思维呈正相关（r=0.652,P<0.01）。结论 银川市老年居民抑郁发生率较高,老年人抑郁与情绪调节策略有关。     

黑龙江省大庆市社区老年人社会隔离与认知功能关联的研究

目的 探讨老年人社会隔离与认知功能间的关联。方法 采用横断面调查对黑龙江省大庆市社区981位≥60岁社区居民采用结构化问卷进行调查。用LSNS-6量表筛查老年人的社会隔离情况、蒙特利尔认知评估量表汉化长沙版评估认知功能。采用多元线性回归分析社会支持网络与认知功能的关系；采用累积比数logit模型分析社会支持网络与不同认知维度的关系。结果 调查对象平均年龄71岁；LSNS-6量表筛查出10.60%（104/981）的老年人存在社会隔离情况；9.48%（93/981）的老年人存在家庭联系疏松；13.97%（137/981）的老年人存在朋友联系疏松。LSNS-6量表得分与认知功能得分存在相关关系，与社会联系越紧密的老年人，认知功能得分越高，偏回归系数为0.10（P< 0.01）。存在社会隔离的老年人认知功能得分为20.38±5.54，而社会联系正常的老年人认知功能得分为22.10±5.01，两者差异有统计学意义（P< 0.01）；与无社会隔离相比，社会隔离与视空间/执行能力（P=0.02）、命名（P=0.03）、语言（P=0.01）和延迟记忆（P< 0.01）等认知维度有关联，而与注意力（P=0.33）、抽象（P=0.49）和定向（P=0.27）方面无明显关联。结论 社会隔离与认知功能密切相关，朋友联系疏松是老年人社会隔离的主要来源。     

中国老年人生活方式和载脂蛋白E基因与认知衰弱发生风险关联的研究

目的 探讨中国老年人群生活方式和载脂蛋白E（ApoE）基因及两者交互作用对认知衰弱风险的影响。方法 研究对象来自中国老年健康影响因素跟踪调查,基于问卷调查收集生活方式信息,基于特定生活方式与结局关联的β系数构建加权生活方式评分以评估综合生活方式,ApoE基因型由rs429358和rs7412单核苷酸多态性位点评估,认知衰弱状态基于认知功能和躯体衰弱评估。采用Cox比例风险回归模型分析生活方式、ApoE基因与认知衰弱风险的关联,并评估生活方式和ApoE基因的相乘和相加交互作用。结果 5 676名老年人年龄M（Q₁,Q₃）为76（68,85）岁,共615名发生认知衰弱。Cox比例风险回归模型显示,中等和高水平的膳食多样性可分别降低18%［风险比（HR）=0.82,95%CI：0.68~1.00］和28%（HR=0.72,95%CI：0.57~0.91）的认知衰弱风险;中等和高水平的体力活动可分别降低31%（HR=0.69,95%CI：0.56~0.85）和23%（HR=0.77,95%CI：0.64~0.93）的认知衰弱风险。整体健康的生活方式可降低40%（HR=0.60,95%CI：0.46~0.78）的认知衰弱风险。ApoE ε4等位基因可使认知衰弱风险升高26%（HR=1.26,95%CI：1.02~1.56）。生活方式和ApoE基因间不存在相乘和相加交互作用。结论 膳食多样化和积极参与体力活动对老年人群认知衰弱具有保护作用,无论是否携带ApoE ε4等位基因,整体健康的生活方式均可降低老年人群认知衰弱的风险。     

衰弱综合征对社区老年糖尿病患者跌倒影响的队列研究

目的 探讨衰弱综合征与社区老年糖尿病患者跌倒之间的关系。方法 在都江堰市平义社区建立≥ 65岁老年人队列,分别于2014年1月和2017年1月进行问卷调查,包括自报糖尿病、跌倒、衰弱状态、认知功能和营养状况等。采用多因素logistic回归方法分析基线衰弱水平与随后3年内跌倒发生风险之间的关系。结果 653名老年人接受了第一次调查,473人完成第二次调查。糖尿病的患病率为13.3%,糖尿病合并衰弱综合征老年人的跌倒发生率为62.5%。衰弱综合征是非糖尿病老年人（OR=3.87,95%CI：1.45~10.28）发生跌倒的独立危险因素,且对糖尿病老年人（OR=6.68,95%CI：1.14~38.99）的影响更强。结论 衰弱综合征是老年糖尿病患者未来发生跌倒的强烈预测因子,需要早期发现和干预。     

北京市社区老年人群日常活动能力状况及城乡比较

目的 探讨北京市社区老年人群日常活动能力（ADL）状况及主要影响因素,并对城乡老年人群的差异进行比较。方法 2010－2014年在北京市海淀区万寿路地区和密云县巨各庄镇对社区≥60岁的老年人群进行两阶段分层整群随机抽样。结果 共纳入4 499名（其中男性1 815名,女性2 684名）社区老年人,年龄60～95（70.3±6.7）岁。相对于城市老年人,农村老年人文化程度较低（小学及以下85.2%）、吸烟（22.8%）、饮酒（43.1%）比例较高。共有87.9%的老年人生活完全自理,ADL受损（含不同程度功能障碍）情况农村（12.4%）高于城市（11.8%）,差异有统计学意义（P=0.039）。不同年龄组比较,ADL受损随年龄增加而显著增加（P<0.05）。多因素分析结果显示,除了城乡差异（P=0.031）,年龄（P=0.013）、文化程度（P=0.015）、体育锻炼（P=0.001）、患有脑卒中（P<0.001）等均是影响ADL受损的重要因素。结论 北京市社区老年人群ADL受损率相对较低,农村高于城市,年龄、文化程度、体育锻炼、患有脑卒中等均与ADL受损有关。     

我国老年人临终前的失能发展轨迹固定队列研究

目的 探索我国老年人临终前的失能发展轨迹。方法 利用2002-2018年中国老年人健康长寿影响因素调查中的日常生活活动能力（ADL）数据拟合纵向项目反应理论（LIRT）模型,通过其中的难度阈值参数分析我国老年人ADL失能顺序;进而拟合混合效应模型分析老年人临终前失能水平的变化轨迹。结果 共纳入2002年进入队列的5 817名老年人,其中男性占41.81%,基线年龄为（86.80±12.40）岁,随访时间M（Q₁,Q₃）为4（3,8）年。LIRT分析结果显示,基本日常生活活动能力（BADL）中难度阈值参数最低的是洗澡部分受限（0.41±0.05）、最高的是室内移动完全受限（6.19±0.16）;而工具性日常生活活动能力（IADL）中难度阈值参数最低的是乘坐公共交通工具部分受限（-3.01±0.07）,最高的是探访邻居完全受限（1.51±0.07）。失能发展轨迹中,临终前男性较女性平均失能水平更低（P<0.001）,独居老人较非独居老人失能水平更低（P<0.001）;文盲老人失能水平高于非文盲老人（P<0.001）。失能水平随时间的线性变化率与二次项系数的估计值分别为0.231（P<0.001）与0.002（P<0.001）。结论 我国老年人失能过程存在一定的规律性,IADL失能早于BADL,失能项目中下肢为主的项目比上肢为主的项目易失能,复杂项目比简单项目易失能。失能轨迹的增速会随时间加快,对失能人群的干预重点应放在女性、非独居、文盲老年人上。     

社区老年人衰弱状态的过渡及其恶化影响因素分析的前瞻性研究

目的 探讨社区老年人衰弱状态的过渡情况,以及衰弱状态恶化的影响因素。方法 在四川省都江堰市平义社区建立≥ 65岁老年人队列,分别于2014年1月和2017年1月进行面对面问卷调查,内容包括衰弱状态、认知功能、营养状况和功能状态等。采用二元logistic回归分析衰弱状态恶化的影响因素。结果 2014年1月调查了653名老年人,2017年1月进行随访,146名失访,共对507名老年人进行分析。基线调查时衰弱和衰弱前期的患病率分别为11.2%（57人）和26.2%（133人）。3年后,205名（40.4%）老年人衰弱状态恶化,276名（54.5%）老年人保持不变,26名（5.1%）老年人衰弱状态改善。在校正基线衰弱状态后,失能（OR=8.27,95% CI：1.62~42.26）、视力障碍（OR=2.02,95% CI：1.27~3.22）、认知功能障碍（OR=1.94,95% CI：1.08~3.48）、自评健康状态差（OR=1.89,95% CI：1.07~3.31）、慢性疼痛（OR=1.57,95% CI：1.03~2.40）和年龄（OR=1.12,95% CI：1.08~1.17）是衰弱状态恶化的危险因素;而超重是衰弱状态恶化的保护因素（OR=0.54,95% CI：0.34~0.85）。结论 衰弱是一种动态综合征,失能、视力障碍、认知功能障碍、自评健康状态差、慢性疼痛和年龄是衰弱状态恶化的独立危险因素,而超重是其保护因素。     

High-technology based gait assessment in frail people: Associations between spatio-temporal and three-dimensional gait characteristics with frailty status across four different frailty measures

Objective

We analyzed associations between a battery of gait characteristics and frailty status across four different frailty instruments in old patients.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting

Geriatric wards of a general hospital.

Participants

123 hospitalized patients aged ≥65 years.

Measurements

Spatio-temporal and three-dimensional gait characteristics were assessed by an electronic walkway and a shoe-mounted, inertial sensor-based mobile gait analysis system. Frailty status was assessed by the frailty phenotype (FP), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), frailty index (FI), and frailty index based on a comprehensive geriatric assessment (FI-CGA).

Results

A reduction in walking speed (FP, FI, FI-CGA), stride length (FP, FI, FI-CGA), maximum toe clearance (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), toe off angle (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), heal strike angle (FI-CGA) and greater stride length variability (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), stride time variability (FP, FI), double support time (FP, FI), and stride width (CFA, FI-CGA) were associated with frailty status across the four frailty instruments (all P < 0.05, respectively). Walking speed (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), stride length (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), maximum toe clearance (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), toe off angle (FP, CFS, FI, FI-CGA), heal strike angle (FP, FI), stride length variability (CFS, FI, FI-CGA), stride time variability (FI), double support time (FP), and stride width (FP, CFS, FI) were related with frailty severity across the four frailty instruments independent of age and sex (all P adjusted < 0.05, respectively).

Conclusions

Gait changes in frail patients include more than solely a reduction in walking speed.

     

Frailty Assessment in the Emergency Department for Patients ≥80 Years Undergoing Urgent Major Surgical Procedures

ObjectivesTo evaluate, in a cohort of adults ≥80 years old, the frailty status at the emergency department (ED) admission, for the in-hospital death risk stratification of patients needing major surgical procedures.DesignSingle-center prospective observational cohort study.Setting and ParticipantsThe study was conducted in the ED of a teaching hospital. We enrolled all patients ≥80 years old consecutively admitted to the ED for conditions requiring urgent surgical procedures, between 2018 and 2021.MethodsClinical variables and frailty status assessed in the ED were evaluated for the association with all-cause in-hospital death. The parameters evaluated were frailty [assessed by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS)], comorbidities, physiological parameters, type of surgery needed, laboratory values at admission. Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for poor outcomes.ResultsThe study enrolled 1039 patients aged ≥80 years [median age 85 years (interquartile range 82-89); 445 males (42.8%)]. Overall, 127 patients (12.2%) were classified as nonfrail (CFS score 1-3), 722 (69.5%) as mild frail (CFS score 4-6), and 190 (18.3%) as frail (CFS score 7-9). The covariate-adjusted analysis revealed that severe frailty [hazard ratio (HR) 12.55, 95% CI 2.96-53.21, P = .016], ≥3 comorbidities (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.31-3.31, P = .002), shock at ED presentation (HR 3.58, 95% CI 2.16-5.92, P < .001), anemia (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.17-3.04, P = .009), and neurosurgery procedures (HR 3.97, 95% CI 1.98-7.96, P < .001) were independent risk factors for in-hospital death.Conclusions and ImplicationsIn patients aged ≥80 years undergoing urgent surgical procedures, the evaluation of functional status in the ED could predict the risk of in-hospital death. Frail patients have an increased risk of death and major complications, whereas those with mild frailty have a similar prognosis compared with the more fit ones. Nonsurgical management should be considered in the case of severely frail and comorbid patients aged ≥80 years needing neurosurgery or abdominal surgery.     

Frailty in Nursing Homes—A Prospective Study Comparing the FRAIL-NH and the Clinical Frailty Scale

ObjectivesFrailty is common in nursing home (NH) residents, but its prevalence in German institutions is unknown. Valid and easy-to-use screening tools are needed to identify frail residents. We used the FRAIL-NH scale and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) to (1) obtain the prevalence of frailty, (2) investigate the agreement between both instruments, and (3) evaluate their predictive validity for adverse health events in German NH residents.DesignProspective cohort study.Setting and participantsGerman NH residents (n = 246, age 84 ± 8 years, 67% female).MethodsFrailty status was categorized according to FRAIL-NH (nonfrail, frail, most frail) and CFS (not frail, mild to moderately frail, severely frail). Agreement between instruments was examined by Spearman correlation, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with 95% CI, and sensitivity and specificity using the “most frail” category of FRAIL-NH as reference standard. Adverse health events (death, hospital admissions, falls) were recorded for 12 months, and multivariate cox and logistic regression models calculated.ResultsAccording to FRAIL-NH, 71.1% were most frail, 26.4% frail, and 2.5% nonfrail. According to CFS, 66.3% were severely frail, 26.8% mild to moderately frail, and 6.9% not frail. Both scales correlated significantly (r = 0.78; R² = 60%). The AUC was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.96). Using a CFS cutoff of 7 points, sensitivity was 0.90 and specificity 0.92. The frailest groups according to both instruments had an increased risk of death [FRAIL-NH hazard ratio (HR) 2.19, 95% CI 1.21-3.99; CFS HR 2.56, 95% CI 1.43-4.58] and hospital admission [FRAIL-NH odds ratio (OR) 1.95, 95% CI 1.06-3.58; CFS OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.01-3.20] compared to less frail residents. The FRAIL-NH predicted recurrent faller status (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.23-5.39).Conclusions and implicationsFrailty is highly prevalent in German NH residents. Both instruments show good agreement despite different approaches and are able to predict adverse health outcomes. Based on our findings and because of its simple administration, CFS may be an alternative to FRAIL-NH for assessing frailty in NHs.     

Validating the Centre of Excellence on Longevity Self-AdMinistered (CESAM) Questionnaire: An Online Self-Reported Tool for Frailty Assessment of Older Adults

ObjectivesSubjective health measures are often used to assess frailty, but the validity of self-reported online tools to identify frailty remains to be established. We aimed to assess concurrent, known-groups, convergent and predictive validity of the Centre of Excellence on Longevity Self-AdMinistered (CESAM) questionnaire for frailty assessment of older adults in an outpatient setting.DesignCross-sectional analysis of 120 participants.Setting and ParticipantsParticipants of age ≥65 were recruited from an outpatient geriatric clinic. Individuals who had severe neurological, cognitive, or motor deficits were excluded.MethodsWe assessed concurrent validity with area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) against the Frailty Index (FI) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). We analyzed known-groups validity between CESAM scores with frailty status (CFS and FI), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), and modified Chinese Mini-Mental State Examination (mCMMSE) using 1-way analysis of variance. We evaluated convergent validity using correlations with MBI, the Lawton index, mCMMSE, and Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Associations between CESAM-identified frailty for clinician-diagnosed geriatric syndromes, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was analyzed using regression analysis.ResultsThe CESAM questionnaire demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance for frailty using FI ≥0.25 (AUC = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.82–0.94; P < .001) and CFS ≥4 (AUC = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68–0.88; P < .001). CESAM scores increased significantly with increasing frailty (both CFS and FI), lower MBI, and lower mCMMSE scores (all P < .001), indicating concurrent validity. The moderate-good correlation of CESAM scores with MBI (r = ?0.61; P < 0.001), Lawton Index (r = ?0.54; P < .001), mCMMSE (r = ?0.53; P < .001) and GDS (r = 0.58; P < .001) supports convergent validity. Using a cutoff of ≥8 for frailty identification, CESAM-identified frailty was associated with cognitive impairment (OR = 3.7; 95% CI: 1.7–8.2; P = .001) depression (OR = 4.0; 95% CI: 1.7–9.6; P = .002), falls (OR = 3.1; 95% CI: 1.2–8.2; P = .021) and poorer HRQoL (β = ?0.1; 95% CI: ?0.2 to ?0.02; P = .017).Conclusion and ImplicationsOur results support the validity of an online self-reported tool to identify frailty and geriatric syndromes in an outpatient setting, an approach that is potentially applicable for remote screening of frailty.     

Ability of 3 Frailty Measures to Predict Short-Term Outcomes in Older Patients Admitted for Post-Acute Inpatient Rehabilitation

ObjectivesTo evaluate the ability of 3 commonly used frailty measures to predict short-term clinical outcomes in older patients admitted for post-acute inpatient rehabilitation.DesignObservational cohort study.Setting and ParticipantsConsecutive patients (n = 207) admitted to a geriatric inpatient rehabilitation facility.MethodsFrailty on admission was assessed using a frailty index, the physical frailty phenotype, and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Predictive capacity of the frailty instruments was analyzed for (1) nonhome discharge, (2) readmission to acute care, (3) functional decline, and (4) prolonged length of stay, using multivariate logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.ResultsThe number of patients classified as frail was 91 (44.0%) with the frailty index, 134 (64.7%) using the frailty phenotype, and 151 (73.0%) with the CFS. The 3 frailty measures revealed acceptable discriminatory accuracy for nonhome discharge (area under the curve ≥ 0.7) but differed in their predictive ability: the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for nonhome discharge was highest for the CFS [6.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-21.1], compared to the frailty index (4.1, 95% CI 2.0-8.4) and the frailty phenotype (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.2-6.6). For the other outcomes, discriminatory accuracy based on ROC tended to be lower and predictive ability varied according to frailty measure. Readmission to acute care from inpatient rehabilitation was predicted by all instruments, most pronounced by the frailty phenotype (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.6-18.8) and the frailty index (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-5.6), and less so by the CFS (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.5-3.8).Conclusions and ImplicationsFrailty measures may contribute to improved prediction of outcomes in geriatric inpatient rehabilitation. The choice of the instrument may depend on the individual outcome of interest and the corresponding discriminatory ability of the frailty measure.     

The Resilience and the Subsequent Hospitalization of Older People with Different Frailty Status: A Prospective Cohort Study

ObjectiveTo evaluate the difference in resilience across frailty status by measuring the impact of unplanned hospitalization across people with different frailty condition on (1) 2-year changes in lean mass, physical performance, and quality of life, and (2) subsequent hospitalization.DesignA prospective cohort study.Setting and ParticipantsThree thousand seventeen older people (73.7 ± 4.9 years) were recruited from the community in Hong Kong.MethodsFrailty status was defined using the Cardiovascular Health Study scale at baseline. Unplanned hospitalization between the 2 visits was obtained from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. The interaction of frailty and hospitalization status on the 2-year changes in lean mass, physical performance, and quality of life were examined using 2-way analysis of covariance. Risk of subsequent hospitalization was estimated using Poisson regression. The effect of prolonged hospitalization, which was defined as 6 or more total hospitalized days, was also examined.ResultsUpon unplanned hospitalization, frail older people had significantly augmented decline than prefrail and robust people in appendicular skeletal mass (?0.44 ± 0.08 kg), height-adjusted appendicular skeletal mas (?0.13 ± 0.03 kg/m²), 5-time chair-stand (4.79 ± 0.60 s), and mental health (?3.72 ± 0.88). The reduction increased with the length of hospitalization. Unplanned hospitalization conferred an augmented risk of subsequent hospitalization for those who were prefrail and frail (IRR = 1.44, 95% confidence interval = 1.30-1.59 and IRR = 1.69, 95% confidence interval = 1.45-1.97, respectively).Conclusions and ImplicationsThe resilience of older people varies according to their frailty status, and the poor resilience may translate to a higher chance of having subsequent hospitalization for prefrail and frail people. These findings emphasized the importance of having the frailty screening in making posthospitalization plans for older people depending on their frailty status and encouraging prefrail and frail older people to build up their resilience.     

Changes in the Severity of Frailty Among Older Adults After 12 Months of Supervised Home-Based Physical Exercise: A Randomized Clinical Trial

ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of 12 months of physiotherapist-supervised, home-based physical exercise on the severity of frailty and on the prevalence of the 5 frailty phenotype criteria, using secondary analyses.DesignRandomized clinical trial, with 1:1 allocation into 12-month home-based physical exercise, or usual care. The multicomponent exercise sessions (60 minutes) were supervised by the physiotherapist and included strength, balance, functional, and flexibility exercises twice a week at participants' homes.Setting and ParticipantsHome-dwelling older adults aged ≥65 years who were frail (meeting 3-5 criteria) or prefrail (1-2 criteria) according to frailty phenotype criteria.MethodsThe severity of frailty (nonfrail, prefrail, or frail) was assessed using frailty phenotype criteria, and the prevalence of each frailty criterion (weight loss, low physical activity, exhaustion, weakness, and slowness) were assessed at baseline and at 12 months.ResultsTwo hundred ninety-nine persons were included in the analyses, of whom 184 were prefrail and 115 were frail at baseline. Their mean age was 82.5 (SD 6.3) years, and 75% were women. There was a significant difference between the exercise and usual care groups' transitions to different frailty states from baseline to 12 months among those who at baseline were prefrail (P = .032) and frail (P = .009). At 12 months, the mean number of frailty criteria had decreased in the exercise group (?0.27, 95% CI –0.47, ?0.08) and remained unchanged in the usual care group (0.01, 95% CI –0.16, 0.18; P = .042). The prevalence of the exhaustion (P = .009) and the low physical activity (P < .001) criteria were lower at 12 months in the exercise group than in the usual care group.Conclusions and ImplicationsThe severity of frailty can be reduced through 12-month supervised home-based exercise training. Exercise should be included in the care of older adults with signs of frailty.