The ability of four frailty screening instruments to predict mortality, hospitalization and dependency in (instrumental) activities of daily living

Linda P. M. Op het Veld (), Anna J. H. M. Beurskens, Henrica C. W. Vet, Sander M. J. Kuijk, KlaasJan Hajema, Gertrudis I. J. M. Kempen and Erik Rossum
Additional contact information
Linda P. M. Op het Veld: Zuyd University of Applied Sciences
Anna J. H. M. Beurskens: Zuyd University of Applied Sciences
Henrica C. W. Vet: Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VU University
Sander M. J. Kuijk: Maastricht University Medical Centre
KlaasJan Hajema: Academic Collaborative Centres Public Health (ACC)
Gertrudis I. J. M. Kempen: Maastricht University
Erik Rossum: Zuyd University of Applied Sciences

European Journal of Ageing, 2019, vol. 16, issue 3, No 11, 387-394

Abstract: Abstract The aim of this study was to assess the predictive ability of the frailty phenotype (FP), Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) and frailty index (FI) for the outcomes mortality, hospitalization and increase in dependency in (instrumental) activities of daily living ((I)ADL) among older persons. This prospective cohort study with 2-year follow-up included 2420 Dutch community-dwelling older people (65+, mean age 76.3 ± 6.6 years, 39.5% male) who were pre-frail or frail according to the FP. Mortality data were obtained from Statistics Netherlands. All other data were self-reported. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was calculated for each frailty instrument and outcome measure. The prevalence of frailty, sensitivity and specificity were calculated using cutoff values proposed by the developers and cutoff values one above and one below the proposed ones (0.05 for FI). All frailty instruments poorly predicted mortality, hospitalization and (I)ADL dependency (AUCs between 0.62–0.65, 0.59–0.63 and 0.60–0.64, respectively). Prevalence estimates of frailty in this population varied between 22.2% (FP) and 64.8% (TFI). The FP and FI showed higher levels of specificity, whereas sensitivity was higher for the GFI and TFI. Using a different cutoff point considerably changed the prevalence, sensitivity and specificity. In conclusion, the predictive ability of the FP, GFI, TFI and FI was poor for all outcomes in a population of pre-frail and frail community-dwelling older people. The FP and the FI showed higher values of specificity, whereas sensitivity was higher for the GFI and TFI.

Keywords: Frail older people; Frailty; Predictive value of tests; Screening; Sensitivity; Specificity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10433-019-00502-4 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujoag:v:16:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10433-019-00502-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.springer ... iences/journal/10433

DOI: 10.1007/s10433-019-00502-4

Access Statistics for this article

European Journal of Ageing is currently edited by Marja Aartsen, Susanne Iwarsson and Prof. Dr. Matthias Kliegel

More articles in European Journal of Ageing from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().