Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3904/kjim.2014.331

The Korean version of the FRAIL scale: clinical feasibility and validity of assessing the frailty status of Korean elderly  

Jung, Hee-Won (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Yoo, Hyun-Jung (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Park, Si-Young (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Kim, Sun-Wook (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Choi, Jung-Yeon (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Yoon, Sol-Ji (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Kim, Cheol-Ho (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Kim, Kwang-il (Geriatric Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
Publication Information
The Korean journal of internal medicine / v.31, no.3, 2016 , pp. 594-600 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background/Aims: The fatigue, resistance, ambulation, illnesses, and loss of weight (FRAIL) scale is a screening tool for frailty status using a simple 5-item questionnaire. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical feasibility and validity of the Korean version of the FRAIL (K-FRAIL) scale. Methods: Questionnaire items were translated and administered to 103 patients aged ${\geq}65years$ who underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessment at the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. In this cross-sectional study, the K-FRAIL scale was compared with the domains and the multidimensional frailty index of the comprehensive geriatric assessment. We also assessed the time required to complete the scale. Results: The participants' mean age was 76.8 years (standard deviation [SD], 6.1), and 55 (53.4%) were males. The mean overall frailty index was 0.19 (SD, 0.17). For K-FRAIL-robust, prefrail, and frail patients, the mean frailty indices were 0.09, 0.18, and 0.34, respectively (p for trend < 0.001). A higher degree of impairment in the K-FRAIL scale was associated with worse nutritional status, poor physical performance, functional dependence, and polypharmacy. The number of items with impairment in the K-FRAIL scale was positively associated with the frailty index (B = 3.73, p < 0.001). The K-FRAIL scale could differentiate vulnerability from robustness with a sensitivity of 0.90 and a specificity of 0.33. Of all patients, 75 (72.8%) completed the K-FRAIL scale within < 3 minutes. Conclusions: The K-FRAIL scale is correlated with the frailty index and is a simple tool to screen for frailty in a clinical setting.
Keywords
Elderly; Frail; Geriatric assessment; Diagnosis;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56:M146-M156.   DOI
2 Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet 2013;381:752-762.   DOI
3 Jung HW, Kim SW, Ahn S, et al. Prevalence and outcomes of frailty in Korean elderly population: comparisons of a multidimensional frailty index with two phenotype models. PLoS One 2014;9:e87958.   DOI
4 Extermann M, Hurria A. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1824-1831.   DOI
5 Kim SW, Han HS, Jung HW, et al. Multidimensional frailty score for the prediction of postoperative mortality risk. JAMA Surg 2014;149:633-640.   DOI
6 American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes: 2014. Diabetes Care 2014;37 Suppl 1:S14-S80.   DOI
7 Stortecky S, Schoenenberger AW, Moser A, et al. Evaluation of multidimensional geriatric assessment as a predictor of mortality and cardiovascular events after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012;5:489-496.   DOI
8 Peel NM, Kuys SS, Klein K. Gait speed as a measure in geriatric assessment in clinical settings: a systematic review. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2013;68:39-46.   DOI
9 Studenski S, Perera S, Patel K, et al. Gait speed and surviv-al in older adults. JAMA 2011;305:50-58.   DOI
10 Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ 2005;173:489-495.   DOI
11 Morley JE, Malmstrom TK, Miller DK. A simple frailty questionnaire (FRAIL) predicts outcomes in middle aged African Americans. J Nutr Health Aging 2012;16:601-608.   DOI
12 Woo J, Leung J, Morley JE. Comparison of frailty indicators based on clinical phenotype and the multiple deficit approach in predicting mortality and physical limitation. J Am Geriatr Soc 2012;60:1478-1486.   DOI
13 Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-383.   DOI
14 Malmstrom TK, Miller DK, Morley JE. A comparison of four frailty models. J Am Geriatr Soc 2014;62:721-726.   DOI
15 Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the barthel index. Md State Med J 1965;14:61-65.
16 Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969;9:179-186.   DOI
17 Burke WJ, Roccaforte WH, Wengel SP. The short form of the Geriatric Depression Scale: a comparison with the 30-item form. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1991;4:173-178.   DOI
18 Kang Y, Na DL, Hahn S. A validity study on the Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) in dementia patients. J Korean Neurol Assoc 1997;15:300-308.
19 Vellas B, Guigoz Y, Garry PJ, et al. The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) and its use in grading the nutritional state of elderly patients. Nutrition 1999;15:116-122.   DOI
20 Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991;39:142-148.   DOI
21 Rockwood K, Mitnitski A. Frailty defined by deficit accumulation and geriatric medicine defined by frailty. Clin Geriatr Med 2011;27:17-26.   DOI
22 Ensrud KE, Ewing SK, Taylor BC, et al. Comparison of 2 frailty indexes for prediction of falls, disability, fractures, and death in older women. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:382-389.   DOI