open access

Vol 70, No 6 (2020)
Review paper
Published online: 2020-12-04
Get Citation

Other frailty assessment instruments

Jakub Kenig
DOI: 10.5603/NJO.2020.0052
·
Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology 2020;70(6):267-271.

open access

Vol 70, No 6 (2020)
Oncogeriatrics
Published online: 2020-12-04

Abstract

At present there is strong evidence demonstrating that not chronological age, but the presence of frailty before surgery is associated with a significant increase in postoperative morbidity, mortality, along with increased risk of delirium, disability, increased length of hospital stay and resource use. Therefore, preoperative frailty evaluations should become obligatory prior to high-risk surgery of older patients suffering from cancer. Currently, the golden standard is the full Geriatric Asses­sment. However, it requires time and, first of all, experience. Various simple frailty screening tools have been developed,, however, currently there is no single ideal one. Therefore, there is a constant search for the “holy grail” of preoperative geriatric evaluations. The Tilburg Frailty Indicator, the Edmonton Frail Scale, the Cardiovascular Health Study index, the Clinical Frailty Scale, the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures index and Frailty Index are examples of evaluation tools that have some features of screening scores and the full Geriatric Assessment. In the present article they were characterised briefly to familiarize the reader with the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Abstract

At present there is strong evidence demonstrating that not chronological age, but the presence of frailty before surgery is associated with a significant increase in postoperative morbidity, mortality, along with increased risk of delirium, disability, increased length of hospital stay and resource use. Therefore, preoperative frailty evaluations should become obligatory prior to high-risk surgery of older patients suffering from cancer. Currently, the golden standard is the full Geriatric Asses­sment. However, it requires time and, first of all, experience. Various simple frailty screening tools have been developed,, however, currently there is no single ideal one. Therefore, there is a constant search for the “holy grail” of preoperative geriatric evaluations. The Tilburg Frailty Indicator, the Edmonton Frail Scale, the Cardiovascular Health Study index, the Clinical Frailty Scale, the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures index and Frailty Index are examples of evaluation tools that have some features of screening scores and the full Geriatric Assessment. In the present article they were characterised briefly to familiarize the reader with the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Get Citation

Keywords

frailty screening; Tilburg Frailty Indicator; Edmonton Frail Scale; Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Index; Frailty Index

About this article
Title

Other frailty assessment instruments

Journal

Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology

Issue

Vol 70, No 6 (2020)

Article type

Review paper

Pages

267-271

Published online

2020-12-04

DOI

10.5603/NJO.2020.0052

Bibliographic record

Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology 2020;70(6):267-271.

Keywords

frailty screening
Tilburg Frailty Indicator
Edmonton Frail Scale
Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Index
Frailty Index

Authors

Jakub Kenig

References (37)
  1. Kenig J, Szabat K. Oncogeriatrics (part 7.). Geriatric assessment for older patients with cancer. NOWOTWORY J Oncol. 2020; 70(4): 153–157.
  2. Bolle S, Smets EMA, Hamaker ME, et al. Medical decision making for older patients during multidisciplinary oncology team meetings. J Geriatr Oncol. 2019; 10(1): 74–83.
  3. Eamer G, Taheri A, Chen SS, et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older people admitted to a surgical service. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 1: CD012485.
  4. Saliba S, Elliott M, Rubenstein LA, et al. The Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13): A Tool for Identifying Vulnerable Elders in the Community. JAGS. 2001; 49: 1691–1699.
  5. Meldon SW, Mion LC, Palmer RM, et al. A brief risk-stratification tool to predict repeat emergency department visits and hospitalizations in older patients discharged from the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2003; 10(3): 224–232.
  6. Soubeyran P, Bellera C, Goyard J, et al. Validation of the G8 screening tool in geriatric oncology: The ONCODAGE project. NOWOTWORY J Oncol. 2008; 26: abstr 20568.
  7. Slaets JPJ. Vulnerability in the elderly: frailty. Med Clin North Am. 2006; 90(4): 593–601.
  8. Overcash JA, Beckstead J, Moody L, et al. The abbreviated comprehensive geriatric assessment (aCGA) for use in the older cancer patient as a prescreen: scoring and interpretation. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006; 59(3): 205–210.
  9. Rockwood K, Stadnyk K, MacKnight C, et al. A brief clinical instrument to classify frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 1999; 353(9148): 205–206.
  10. Balducci L, Beghe C. The application of the principles of geriatrics to the management of the older person with cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2000; 35(3): 147–154.
  11. Kenig J, Szabat K, Mituś J, et al. Usefulness of eight screening tools for predicting frailty and postoperative short- and long-term outcomes among older patients with cancer who qualify for abdominal surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020; 46(11): 2091–2098.
  12. Gobbens RJJ, van Assen MA, Santiago LM, et al. The Tilburg Frailty Indicator: psychometric properties. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2010; 11(5): 344–355.
  13. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001; 56(3): M146–M156.
  14. Gobbens RJJ, van Assen MA, Luijkx KG, et al. The predictive validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator: disability, health care utilization, and quality of life in a population at risk. Gerontologist. 2012; 52(5): 619–631.
  15. Uchmanowicz I, Jankowska-Polańska B, Łoboz-Rudnicka M, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and reliability testing of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator for optimizing care of Polish patients with frailty syndrome. Clin Interv Aging. 2014; 9: 997–1001.
  16. Walston JD, Bandeen-Roche K. Frailty: a tale of two concepts. BMC Med. 2015; 13: 185.
  17. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005; 173(5): 489–495.
  18. Rockwood K, Theou O. Using the Clinical Frailty Scale in Allocating Scarce Health Care Resources. Can Geriatr J. 2020; 23(3): 210–215.
  19. Abellan van Kan G, Rolland Y, Andrieu S, et al. Gait speed at usual pace as a predictor of adverse outcomes in community-dwelling older people an International Academy on Nutrition and Aging (IANA) Task Force. J Nutr Health Aging. 2009; 13(10): 881–889.
  20. Chandoo A, Chi CH, Ji W, et al. Gait speed predicts post-operative medical complications in elderly gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy. ANZ J Surg. 2018; 88(7-8): 723–726.
  21. Pamoukdjian F, Canoui-Poitrine F, Longelin-Lombard C, et al. Diagnostic performance of gait speed, G8 and G8 modified indices to screen for vulnerability in older cancer patients: the prospective PF-EC cohort study. Oncotarget. 2017; 8(31): 50393–50402.
  22. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, et al. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing. 2006; 35(5): 526–529.
  23. Perna S, Francis MD, Bologna C, et al. Performance of Edmonton Frail Scale on frailty assessment: its association with multi-dimensional geriatric conditions assessed with specific screening tools. BMC Geriatr. 2017; 17(1): 2.
  24. Dasgupta M, Rolfson DB, Stolee P, et al. Frailty is associated with postoperative complications in older adults with medical problems. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2009; 48(1): 78–83.
  25. He Y, Li LW, Hao Y, et al. Assessment of predictive validity and feasibility of Edmonton Frail Scale in identifying postoperative complications among elderly patients: a prospective observational study. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1): 14682.
  26. De Hert S, Staender S, Fritsch G, et al. Pre-operative evaluation of adults undergoing elective noncardiac surgery: Updated guideline from the European Society of Anaesthesiology. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2018; 35(6): 407–465.
  27. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005; 173(5): 489–495.
  28. Velanovich V, Antoine H, Swartz A, et al. Accumulating deficits model of frailty and postoperative mortality and morbidity: its application to a national database. J Surg Res. 2013; 183(1): 104–110.
  29. Mogal H, Vermilion SA, Dodson R, et al. Modified Frailty Index Predicts Morbidity and Mortality After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017; 24(6): 1714–1721.
  30. Garland M, Hsu FC, Shen P, et al. Optimal Modified Frailty Index Cutoff in Older Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients. Am Surg. 2017; 83(8): 860–865.
  31. Ensrud KE, Ewing SK, Cawthon PM, et al. Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Research Group. A comparison of frailty indexes for the prediction of falls, disability, fractures, and mortality in older men. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009; 57(3): 492–498.
  32. Choe YR, Joh JY, Kim YP. Association between frailty and readmission within one year after gastrectomy in older patients with gastric cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. 2017; 8(3): 185–189.
  33. Watt J, Tricco AC, Talbot-Hamon C, et al. Identifying older adults at risk of harm following elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2018; 16(1): 2.
  34. Kim S, Brooks AK, Groban L. Preoperative assessment of the older surgical patient: honing in on geriatric syndromes. Clin Interv Aging. 2015; 10: 13–27.
  35. McIsaac DI, Taljaard M, Bryson GL, et al. Frailty as a predictor of death or new disability afer surgery: a prospective cohort study. Ann Surg. 2018; 210: 901–908.
  36. Aucoin SD, Hao M, Sohi R, et al. Accuracy and Feasibility of Clinically Applied Frailty Instruments before Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Anesthesiology. 2020; 133(1): 78–95.
  37. Sutton JL, Gould RL, Daley S, et al. Psychometric properties of multicomponent tools designed to assess frailty in older adults: A systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2016; 16: 55.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

Wydawcą serwisu jest VM Media sp. z o.o. VM Group sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl