The FRAIL-NH Scale: Systematic Review of the Use, Validity and Adaptations for Frailty Screening in Nursing Homes.

Autor: Liau SJ; Shin J. Liau, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 407 Royal Parade, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. E-mail: shin.liau@monash.edu., Lalic S, Visvanathan R, Dowd LA, Bell JS
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: The journal of nutrition, health & aging [J Nutr Health Aging] 2021; Vol. 25 (10), pp. 1205-1216.
DOI: 10.1007/s12603-021-1694-3
Abstrakt: Objectives: To investigate frailty prevalence, cross-sectional associations, predictive validity, concurrent validity, and cross-cultural adaptations of the FRAIL-NH scale.
Design: Systematic review.
Setting and Participants: Frail residents living in nursing homes.
Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched from January 2015 to June 2021 for primary studies that used the FRAIL-NH scale, irrespective of study designs and publication language.
Results: Overall, 40 studies conducted across 20 countries utilized the FRAIL-NH scale; majority in Australia (n=14), followed by China (n=6), United States (n=3), and Spain (n=3). The scale has been translated and back-translated into Brazilian Portuguese, Chinese, and Japanese. Various cut-offs have been used, with ≥2 and ≥6 being the most common cut-offs for frail and most frail, respectively. When defined using these cut-offs, frailty prevalence varied from 15.1-79.5% (frail) to 28.5-75.0% (most frail). FRAIL-NH predicted falls (n=2), hospitalization or length of stay (n=4), functional or cognitive decline (n=4), and mortality (n=9) over a median follow-up of 12 months. FRAIL-NH has been compared to 16 other scales, and was correlated with Fried's phenotype (FP), Frailty Index (FI), and FI-Lab. Four studies reported fair-to-moderate agreements between FRAIL-NH and FI, FP, and the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. Ten studies assessed the sensitivity and specificity of different FRAIL-NH cut-offs, with ≥8 having the highest sensitivity (94.1%) and specificity (82.8%) for classifying residents as frail based on FI, while two studies reported an optimal cut-off of ≥2 based on FI and FP, respectively.
Conclusion: In seven years, the FRAIL-NH scale has been applied in 20 countries and adapted into three languages. Despite being applied with a range of cut-offs, FRAIL-NH was associated with higher care needs and demonstrated good agreement with other well-established but more complex scales. FRAIL-NH was predictive of adverse outcomes across different settings, highlighting its value in guiding care for frail residents in nursing homes.
Competing Interests: RV was previously a board member of Resthaven Inc. and is currently on the clinical governance committee. In the recent past, she has received honoraria, speakers and educational grants in various combinations from Nutricia, Abbott and Nestlé. JSB has received research grants paid to his employer from NHMRC, Dementia Australia Research Foundation, Yulgilbar Foundation, Dementia Centre for Research Collaboration, Victorian Government Department of Health and Human Services, GlaxoSmithKline Independent Medical Education, Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission, and several aged care provider organizations. SJL, SL and LAD declare no conflicts of interest.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: