پیوندهای مفید
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 1,089 |
| تعداد مقالات | 9,995 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 26,383,821 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 7,279,699 |
Psychometric Properties of Frailty Syndrome Checklist 5-Items in Frail Older Adults in Iran | ||
| Journal of Health Sciences & Surveillance System | ||
| دوره 9، شماره 3، مهر 2021، صفحه 162-168 اصل مقاله (916.66 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jhsss.2021.88650.1152 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Foruzan Tavan1؛ Abdolrahim Asadollahi* 1، 2 | ||
| 1Department of Health Promotion and Aging, Faculty of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran | ||
| 2The Australian Centre on Quality of Life (ACQOL), Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Victoria 3125, Melbourne, Australia | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: Frailty syndrome involves a complex combination of the natural process of getting old with different medical problems. Different indexes have been designed for each physical, mental, and social dimensions of frailty. Fried’s five-item index of frailty syndrome checklist is one of the most applicable scales to screen frailty. This study aimed to determine a psychometric index of frailty and the cut-off points for the Iranian elderly population. Methods: In a cross-sectional and psychpmetric study, 249 frail elderly people were selected among members of two Iranian Army Retirees Clubs in 2019. This was a cross-sectional-psychometric study which aimed at determining the psychometric index and cut-off points of a brief checklist of 5-item FSC among Iranian adults older than 60 years old and comparing this to prior results in different countries. Results: The data were analyzed by ANOVA, multi-variable regression, confirmatory, and exploratory factor analysis, and ROC analysis via SPSS 25 and AMOS 24. The validity of the study findings was determined by internal validity, high correlation of 5 questions, confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis of 3 subdomains with a clarity value of 0.87, and high goodness of fit index (GFI). Conclusion: The determined cut-off points were compatible with those of Fried’s prior study. The designed tools used in this study evaluated frailty syndrome of the Iranian elderly in elderly rehabilitation studies with high confidence. The application of the tool would provide caregivers and policymakers with additional information as to caring for this population. Introduction The world population has become older due to the decreasing mortality rate, increasing life expectancy, and enhanced healthcare technologies.(1) Worldwide, the elderly population is expected to increase from 9% to 16% during 35 years from 1995 to 2030. Regionally, the elderly population is expected to increase in Asia and Iran from 9.3% to 18.6% and from 5.17 to 6.5 % over the same period, respectively.(2) Increased chronic diseases and multi-morbidity in the elderly and the associated increased prevalence of inabilities are the main concern in the growth of the elderly population . Senescence syndromes are groups of prevalent characteristics among the elderly and, as such, are not considered a disease. These syndromes are a group of prevalent characteristics among the elderly, which are not considered a disease. Frailty syndrome involves a complex combination of the natural processes of getting old with different medical problems,(3)such as weakness, dullness, decreased energy, decreased physical activity, and unintentional weight loss (in more intense cases).(3)Frailty syndrome consists of physiological disorders in six different systems (hematic, inflammatory, hormonal, obesity, neuromuscular, and nutritional).(4) The brain, endocrine, musculoskeletal, and immune systems are mostly associated with frailty syndrome, which have been studied considerably.(4) The prevalence of frailty due to its wide definition and variety of measurement tools is estimated 19.6% in Latin America and the Caribbean (5), from 3.9 per cent in China to 26% and 51.4% in India and Cuba, respectively (6), 35.7% in Brazil (7), 10% in Japan (8), and in European countries from 7.7 per cent of the Swedish elderly to 15.6% Portuguese older adults (9). There are no national frailty data in the elderly population of Iran, bBut it can be assumed to be similar to developing countries like India and Brazil. Most of the tools developed to evaluate frailty have a frailty pre-diagnosis, enabling the authorities to identify people at high risk of frailty.(10, 11) Frailty can be examined in both clinical and social contexts. The clinical view argues that frailty increases the risks of side effects, such as fall, hospitalization, inability, and death.(12) The social view identifies the groups in need of additional medical care services and at high risk of dependency.(12) Policymakers and providers of health services have realized that frailty could significantly affect people, caregivers, healthcare systems, and society.(11, 12) Furthermore, concerns have been raised regarding prevention and health management plans due to the effect of frailty on the healthcare of patients.(13) If frailty can be diagnosed, prevented, and treated by identifying its different reasons and factors, this can lead to the prevention or at least delay in the onset of frailty syndrome. As some recent studies have suggested, frailty sequences could be reversed by implementing specific practical plans and nutritional supplements (3, 14, 15). Therefore, identification of consequences relevant to frailty is highly vital, indicating the need for a tool to predict frailty challenges in Iran. These challenges can be screened, and definite cut-off points can be determined for Iranian frail patients. These actions help the healthcare policymakers in the country to systemize and optimize their decisions, just as many developed countries have done in recent years.(16) Fried’s five-item index of frailty syndrome checklist (5-Item FSC) is one of the most applicable scales to screen frailty.(16) Psychometric properties and cut-off points of FSC differ from one country to another regarding their cultural, social, nutritional, and even phenotypical differences (17) compared to other indices. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the validity, reliability, and cut-off points of 5-item FSC for Iranian elderly. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Factor Analysis؛ ROC Curve؛ Frail Elderly؛ Aged؛ Healthy Aging؛ Aging؛ Falling؛ Instrumentation؛ Health Status Indicators؛ Patient Health Questionnaire؛ Frailty؛ Accidental Falls؛ Psychometrics؛ Psychological Tests؛ Neuropsychological Tests؛ Behavior Rating Scale | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. Lee S, Oh E, Hong G-RS. Comparison of Factors Associated with Fear of Falling between Older Adults with and without a Fall History. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(5):982.
2. Ghahremani L, Niknami S, Nazari M. The Prediction of Physical Activity Intention and Behavior in Elderly Male Residents of a Nursing Home: A Comparison of Two Behavioral Theories %J Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2012;37(1):23-31.
3. Bubela D, Sacharko L, Chan J, Brady M. Balance and Functional Outcomes for Older Community-Dwelling Adults Who Practice Tai Chi and Those Who Do Not: A Comparative Study. Journal of geriatric physical therapy (2001). 2019;42(4):209-15.
4. Zareyi H, Norasteh A, Koohboomi M. Effect of Combined Training (Strength and Stretching) on Balance, Risk of Falling, and Quality of Life in the Elderly %J The Scientific Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2018;7(2):201-8.
5. Da Mata FAF, Pereira PPdS, Andrade KRCd, Figueiredo ACMG, Silva MT, Pereira MG. Prevalence of Frailty in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PloS one. 2016;11(8):e0160019.
6. Siriwardhana DD, Hardoon S, Rait G, Weerasinghe MC, Walters KR. Prevalence of frailty and prefrailty among community-dwelling older adults in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ open. 2018;8(3):e018195.
7. Cruz DTd, Vieira MdT, Bastos RR, Leite ICG. Factors associated with frailty in a community-dwelling population of older adults. Revista de Saúde Pública. 2017;51.
8. Satake S, Arai H. Chapter 1 Frailty: Definition, diagnosis, epidemiology. 2020;20(S1):7-13.
9. Manfredi G, Midão L, Paúl C, Cena C, Duarte M, Costa E. Prevalence of frailty status among the European elderly population: Findings from the Survey of Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe. Geriatrics & gerontology international. 2019;19(8):723-9.
10. Buckinx F, Rolland Y, Reginster J-Y, Ricour C, Petermans J, Bruyère O. Burden of frailty in the elderly population: perspectives for a public health challenge. Arch Public Health. 2015;73(1):19-.
11. Bouillon K, Kivimaki M, Hamer M, Sabia S, Fransson EI, Singh-Manoux A, et al. Measures of frailty in population-based studies: an overview. BMC Geriatrics. 2013;13(1):64.
12. Ethun CG, Bilen MA, Jani AB, Maithel SK, Ogan K, Master VA. Frailty and cancer: Implications for oncology surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2017;67(5):362-77.
13. Buta B, Choudhury PP, Xue Q-L, Chaves P, Bandeen-Roche K, Shardell M, et al. The Association of Vitamin D Deficiency and Incident Frailty in Older Women: The Role of Cardiometabolic Diseases. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017;65(3):619-24.
14. Nutakor JA, Gavu AK. Frailty Screening Tools: Frail Detection to Primary Assessment %J Elderly Health Journal. 2020;6(1):64-9.
15. Buta B, Choudhury PP, Xue Q-L, Chaves P, Bandeen-Roche K, Shardell M, et al. The Association of Vitamin D Deficiency and Incident Frailty in Older Women: The Role of Cardiometabolic Diseases. 2017;65(3):619-24.
16. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. The journals of gerontology Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences. 2001;56(3):M146-56.
17. Dent E, Kowal P, Hoogendijk EO. Frailty measurement in research and clinical practice: A review. European journal of internal medicine. 2016;31:3-10.
18. Faller JW, Pereira DDN, de Souza S, Nampo FK, Orlandi FS, Matumoto S. Instruments for the detection of frailty syndrome in older adults: A systematic review. PloS one. 2019;14(4):e0216166.
19. Checa-López M, Oviedo-Briones M, Pardo-Gómez A, Gonzales-Turín J, Guevara-Guevara T, Carnicero JA, et al. FRAILTOOLS study protocol: a comprehensive validation of frailty assessment tools to screen and diagnose frailty in different clinical and social settings and to provide instruments for integrated care in older adults. BMC Geriatrics. 2019;19(1):86.
20. Ghahremani L, Niknami S, Nazari M. The prediction of physical activity intention and behavior in elderly male residents of a nursing home: a comparison of two behavioral theories. Iranian journal of medical sciences. 2012;37(1):23-31.
21. Xue Q-L, Tian J, Fried LP, Kalyani RR, Varadhan R, Walston JD, et al. Physical Frailty Assessment in Older Women: Can Simplification Be Achieved Without Loss of Syndrome Measurement Validity? Am J Epidemiol. 2016;183(11):1037-44.
22. Pinquart M, Sörensen S. Associations of stressors and uplifts of caregiving with caregiver burden and depressive mood: a meta-analysis. The journals of gerontology Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences. 2003;58(2):P112-28.
23. Dent E, Lien C, Lim WS, Wong WC, Wong CH, Ng TP, et al. The Asia-Pacific Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Frailty. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2017;18(7):564-75.
24. Cohen AA, Legault V, Fuellen G, Fülöp T, Fried LP, Ferrucci L. The risks of biomarker-based epidemiology: Associations of circulating calcium levels with age, mortality, and frailty vary substantially across populations. Exp Gerontol. 2018;107:11-7.
25. Lorenzo-López L, Maseda A, de Labra C, Regueiro-Folgueira L, Rodríguez-Villamil JL, Millán-Calenti JC. Nutritional determinants of frailty in older adults: A systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17(1):108.
26. Kim S, Kim M, Jung HW, Won CW. Development of a Frailty Phenotype Questionnaire for Use in Screening Community-Dwelling Older Adults. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2020;21(5):660-4.
27. Batko-Szwaczka A, Dudzińska-Griszek J, Hornik B, Janusz-Jenczeń M, Włodarczyk I, Wnuk B, et al. Frailty Phenotype: Evidence of Both Physical and Mental Health Components in Community-Dwelling Early-Old Adults. Clinical interventions in aging. 2020;15:141-50.
28. Pao YC, Chen CY, Chang CI, Chen CY, Tsai JS. Self-reported exhaustion, physical activity, and grip strength predict frailty transitions in older outpatients with chronic diseases. Medicine. 2018;97(23):e10933.
29. Bieniek J, Wilczyński K, Szewieczek J. Fried frailty phenotype assessment components as applied to geriatric inpatients. Clinical interventions in aging. 2016;11:453-9.
30. Jung HW, Kim S, Won CW. Validation of the Korean Frailty Index in community-dwelling older adults in a nationwide Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort study. The Korean journal of internal medicine. 2021;36(2):456-66.
31. Alqahtani BA, Nasser TA. Assessment of frailty in Saudi community-dwelling older adults: validation of measurements. Annals of Saudi medicine. 2019;39(3):197-204.
32. Hubbard RE, Peel NM, Smith M, Dawson B, Lambat Z, Bak M, et al. Feasibility and construct validity of a Frailty index for patients with chronic kidney disease. Australasian journal on ageing. 2015;34(3):E9-12.
33. Vickers NJ. Animal Communication: When I'm Calling You, Will You Answer Too? Curr Biol. 2017;27(14):R713-R5. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 806 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 892 |
||