Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Clin Interv Aging ; 15: 265-274, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32110005

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is a self-report user-friendly questionnaire for assessing multidimensional frailty among community-dwelling older people. The main aim of this study is to re-evaluate the validity of the TFI, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, focusing on the predictive value of the total TFI and its physical, psychological, and social domains for adverse outcomes disability, indicators of healthcare utilization, and falls. METHODS: The validity of the TFI was determined in a sample of 180 Dutch community-dwelling older people aged 70 years and older. The participants completed questionnaires including the TFI, the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) for assessing disability, and questions with regard to health care utilization and falls in 2016 and again one year later. RESULTS: The physical and psychological domains of the TFI were significantly correlated as expected with adverse outcomes disability, many indicators of healthcare utilization, and falls. Regression analyses showed that physical frailty was mostly responsible for the effect of frailty on the adverse outcomes. The cross-sectional and longitudinal predictive validity of total frailty with respect to disability and receiving personal care was excellent, evidenced by Areas Under the Curves (AUCs) >0.8. In most cases, using the cut-off point 5 for total frailty ensured the best values for sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: The present study provided new, additional evidence for the validity of the TFI for assessing frailty in Dutch community-dwelling older people aiming to prevent or delay adverse outcomes, including disability.


Subject(s)
Frail Elderly , Frailty/diagnosis , Geriatric Assessment/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Accidental Falls , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disability Evaluation , Disabled Persons/statistics & numerical data , Female , Frailty/physiopathology , Frailty/psychology , Health Status , Humans , Independent Living , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Netherlands , Physical Functional Performance , Psychometrics/methods , Regression Analysis , Reproducibility of Results , Self Report , Social Participation
2.
Clin Interv Aging ; 14: 231-239, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30787599

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The effects of sociodemographic factors on quality of life in older people differ strongly, possibly due to the fact that different measurement instruments have been used. The main aim of this cross-sectional study is to compare the associations of sex, age, marital status, education, and income with quality of life assessed with the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire-BREF (WHOQOL-BREF), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire-Older Adults Module (WHOQOL-OLD). METHODS: The associations between sociodemographic factors and eleven quality of life domains were examined using a sample of 1,492 Dutch people aged ≥50 years. Participants completed the "Senioren Barometer", a web-based questionnaire including sociodemographic factors, the SF-12, the WHOQOL-BREF, and the WHOQOL-OLD. RESULTS: All the sociodemographic factors together explained a significant part of the variance of all the quality of life domains' scores, ranging from 5% to 17% for the WHOQOL-BREF, 5.8% to 6.7% for the SF-12, and 1.4% to 26% for the WHOQOL-OLD. Being a woman and being older were negatively associated with two and four quality of life domains, respectively. Being a woman, being married or cohabiting, and having higher education and a higher income were positively associated with six, six, one, and eleven quality of life domains, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the associations of sociodemographic factors and quality of life in middle-aged and older people depend on the instruments used to assess quality of life. We recommend that health care and welfare professionals focus particularly on people with a low income and carry out interventions aimed at improving their quality of life.


Subject(s)
Quality of Life , Socioeconomic Factors , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , Sex Factors , World Health Organization
3.
Clin Interv Aging ; 14: 773-780, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31190765

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between frailty syndrome and the nutritional status of older patients. Material and methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in a sample of 120 patients hospitalized at the Geriatric Clinic between January 2017 and May 2017. The research tools were the Frailty Instrument of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE-FI), including relevant anthropometric measurements and muscle strength measurement, and the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). All the calculations were performed using the Statistica 10.0 program. The p-values lower than 0.05 were considered as statistically significant. Results: The mean age of the participants was 71 years (SD=9.03). Most participants were from urban areas. More than half of the participants (53.3%) were women. Based on the SHARE-FI, the frailty syndrome was found in 33.3% of the participants. The mean value in the MNA scale was 24.4 points (SD=3.4). The frailty syndrome was significantly correlated to gender (p<0.025), financial status (p=0.036) and MNA (p<0.01) score. A statistically significant difference was observed between gender (p=0.026), financial status (p=0.016), place of living (p=0.046) and MNA score. Conclusion: This study confirmed significant correlations between the frailty syndrome and the nutritional status of older adults. In terms of prevention and clinical application, it seems important to control the nutritional status of older people and the frailty syndrome. The above-mentioned scales should be used to evaluate patients, analyze the risk and plan the intervention for that group of patients.


Subject(s)
Frail Elderly/statistics & numerical data , Frailty/epidemiology , Nutritional Status , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Europe , Female , Geriatric Assessment , Health Surveys , Humans , Male , Nutrition Assessment , Sex Factors
4.
Clin Interv Aging ; 13: 325-334, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29520132

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to determine the associations between frailty and multimorbidity on the one hand and quality of life on the other in community-dwelling older people. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all people aged 70 years and older belonging to a general practice in the Netherlands; 241 persons completed the questionnaire (response rate 47.5%). For determining multimorbidity, nine chronic diseases were examined by self-report. Frailty was assessed by the Tilburg Frailty Indicator, and quality of life was assessed by the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument-Older Adults Module. RESULTS: Multimorbidity, physical, psychological, as well as social frailty components were negatively associated with quality of life. Multimorbidity and all 15 frailty components together explained 11.6% and 36.5% of the variance of the score on quality of life, respectively. CONCLUSION: Health care professionals should focus their interventions on the physical, psychological, and social domains of human functioning. Interprofessional cooperation between health care professionals and welfare professionals seems necessary to be able to meet the needs of frail older people.


Subject(s)
Frail Elderly , Frailty , Quality of Life , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chronic Disease , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Frail Elderly/psychology , Frail Elderly/statistics & numerical data , Frailty/epidemiology , Frailty/etiology , Frailty/physiopathology , Frailty/psychology , Geriatric Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Independent Living/statistics & numerical data , Male , Needs Assessment , Netherlands/epidemiology , Self Report , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Clin Interv Aging ; 12: 1739-1752, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29089748

ABSTRACT

Due to rapidly aging human populations, frailty has become an essential concept, as it identifies older people who have higher risk of adverse outcomes, such as disability, institutionalization, lower quality of life, and premature death. The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is a user-friendly questionnaire based on a multidimensional approach to frailty, assessing physical, psychologic, and social aspects of human functioning. This review aims to explore the efficiency of the TFI in assessing frailty as a means to carry out research into the antecedents and consequences of frailty, and its use both in daily practice and for future intervention studies. Using a multidimensional approach to frailty, in contexts where health care professionals or researchers may have no time to interview or examine the client, we recommend employing the TFI because there is robust evidence of its reliability and validity and it is easy and quick to administer. More studies are needed to establish whether the TFI is suitable for intervention studies not only in the community, but also for specific groups such as patients in the hospital or admitted to an emergency department. We conclude that it is important to not only determine the deficits that frail older people may have, but also to assess their balancing strengths and resources. In order to be able to meet the individual needs of frail older persons, traditional and often fragmented elderly care should be developed toward a more proactive elderly care, in which frail older persons and their informal network are in charge.


Subject(s)
Frail Elderly , Frailty/diagnosis , Geriatric Assessment/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Aged , Female , Health Status , Humans , Interpersonal Relations , Mental Health , Psychometrics , Quality of Life , Reproducibility of Results
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL