Screening for frailty in primary care: Accuracy of gait speed and hand-grip strength.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the accuracy of individual Fried frailty phenotype measures in identifying the Fried frailty phenotype in primary care. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: A community-based primary care practice in Kitchener, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 516 patients 75 years of age and older who underwent frailty screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Using modified Fried frailty phenotype measures, frailty criteria included gait speed, hand-grip strength as measured by a dynamometer, and self-reported exhaustion, low physical activity, and unintended weight loss. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and precision were calculated for single-trait and dual-trait markers. RESULTS: Complete frailty screening data were available for 383 patients. The overall prevalence of frailty based on the presence of 3 or more frailty criteria was 6.5%. The overall prevalence of individual Fried frailty phenotype markers ranged from 2.1% to 19.6%. The individual criteria all showed sensitivity and specificity of more than 80%, with the exception of weight loss (8.3% and 97.4%, respectively). The positive predictive value of the single-item criteria in predicting the Fried frailty phenotype ranged from 12.5% to 52.5%. When gait speed and hand-grip strength were combined as a dual measure, the positive predictive value increased to 87.5%. CONCLUSION: There is a need for frailty measures that are psychometrically sound and feasible to administer in primary care. While use of gait speed or grip strength alone was found to be sensitive and specific as a proxy for the Fried frailty phenotype, use of both measures together was found to be accurate, precise, specific, and more sensitive than other possible combinations. Assessing both measures is feasible within primary care.

A glossary for biometeorology.

Here we present, for the first time, a glossary of biometeorological terms. The glossary aims to address the need for a reliable source of biometeorological definitions, thereby facilitating communication and mutual understanding in this rapidly expanding field. A total of 171 terms are defined, with reference to 234 citations. It is anticipated that the glossary will be revisited in coming years, updating terms and adding new terms, as appropriate. The glossary is intended to provide a useful resource to the biometeorology community, and to this end, readers are encouraged to contact the lead author to suggest additional terms for inclusion in later versions of the glossary as a result of new and emerging developments in the field.