Cognitive Function and Amyloid Marker in Frail Older Adults: The COGFRAIL Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty and cognitive impairment are common manifestations of the ageing process and are closely related. But the mechanisms linking aging, physical frailty, and cognitive disorders, are complex and remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aim to explore the role of cerebral amyloid pathology, but also a range of nutritional, physical, biological or brain-aging marker in the development of cognitive frailty. METHOD: COGFRAIL study is a monocentric prospective study of frail older patients with an objective cognitive impairment (Clinical Dementia Rating Scale global score at 0.5 or 1). Three-hundred-and-twenty-one patients are followed up every 6 months, for 2 years. Clinical assessment at baseline and during follow-up included frailty, physical, mood, sensory, nutritional, and cognitive assessment (with a set of neuropsychological tests). Cerebral amyloid pathology is measured by amyloid Positron Emission Tomography (PET) or amyloid-ß-1-42 level in cerebrospinal fluid. Brain magnetic resonance imaging, measurement of body composition using Dual X Ray Absorptiometry and blood sampling are performed. The main outcome of the study is to assess the prevalence of positive cerebral amyloid status according to amyloid PET or amyloid-ß-1-42 level CSF. Secondary outcomes included biological, nutritional, MRI imaging, cognitive, clinical, physical and body composition markers to better understand the mechanisms of cognitive frailty. PERSPECTIVE: COGFRAIL study will give the opportunity to better understand the link between Gerosciences, frailty, cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease, and to better characterize the physical and cognitive trajectories of frail older adults according to their amyloid status. Understanding the relationship between physical frailty and cognitive impairment is a prerequisite for the development of new interventions that could prevent and treat both conditions.

How Older Persons Perceive the Loss of Independence: The Need of a Holistic Approach to Frailty.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004, the definition of the frailty syndrome has shifted from purely physical criteria to a more comprehensive consideration of the individual, including their psychosocial criteria. In this study, qualitative research methods were used as a complementary approach in order to enrich the existing quantitative results in this area. OBJECTIVE: To understand the views of older persons on the risk of loss of independence. METHODS: The study population comprised people over 75 years of age who were living at home in the south-west of France and were considered to be at risk of losing their independence. Data were collected using individual semi-structured in-depth interviews, accompanied by observations. Inductive analysis was carried out according to grounded theory methods. RESULTS: Fifteen individual interviews were conducted to achieve theoretical data saturation. Analysis of the content of the interviews revealed seven risk factors for the loss of independence: poor mental health, poor physical health, social isolation, no longer leaving the home, an unsuitable environment, unsuitable living conditions, and few resources. CONCLUSIONS: These results complement the purely physical approach to screening for the frailty syndrome and lead us to reconsider our screening approach to include a more holistic view of the older person and their circumstances.

Description of 1,108 older patients referred by their physician to the "Geriatric Frailty Clinic (G.F.C) for Assessment of Frailty and Prevention of Disability" at the gerontopole.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is considered as an early stage of disability which, differently from disability, is still amenable for preventive interventions and is reversible. In 2011, the "Geriatric Frailty Clinic (G.F.C) for Assessment of Frailty and Prevention of Disability" was created in Toulouse, France, in association with the University Department of General Medicine and the Midi-Pyrénées Regional Health Authority. This structure aims to support the comprehensive and multidisciplinary assessment of frail older persons, to identify the specific causes of frailty and to design a personalized preventive plan of intervention against disability. In the present paper, we describe the G.F.C structure, organization, details of the global evaluation and preventive interventions against disability, and provide the main characteristics of the first 1,108 patients evaluated during the first two years of operation. METHODS: Persons aged 65 years and older, considered as frail by their physician (general practitioner, geriatrician or specialist) in the Toulouse area, are invited to undergo a multidisciplinary evaluation at the G.F.C. Here, the individual is assessed in order to detect the potential causes for frailty and/or disability. At the end of the comprehensive evaluation, the team members propose to the patient (in agreement with the general practitioner) a Personalized Prevention Plan (PPP) specifically tailored to his/her needs and resources. The G.F.C also provides the patient's follow-up in close connection with family physicians. RESULTS: Mean age of our population was 82.9 ± 6.1 years. Most patients were women (n=686, 61.9%). According to the Fried criteria, 423 patients (39.1%) were pre-frail, and 590 (54.5%) frail. Mean ADL (Activities of Daily Living) score was 5.5 ± 1.0. Consistently, IADL (Instrumental ADL) showed a mean score of 5.6 ± 2.4. The mean gait speed was 0.78 ± 0.27 and 25.6% (272) of patients had a SPPB (Short Physical Performance Battery) score equal to or higher than 10. Dementia was observed in 14.9% (111) of the G.F.C population according to the CDR scale (CDR ≥2). Eight percent (84) presented an objective state of protein-energy malnutrition with MNA (Mini Nutritional Assessment) score < 17 and 39.5% (414) were at risk of malnutrition (MNA=17-23.5). Concerning PPP, for 54.6% (603) of patients, we found at least one medical condition which needed a new intervention and for 32.8% (362) substantial therapeutic changes were recommended. A nutritional intervention was proposed for 61.8% (683) of patients, a physical activity intervention for 56.7% (624) and a social intervention for 25.7% (284). At the time of analysis, a one-year reassessment had been carried out for 139 (26.7%) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The G.F.C was developed to move geriatric medicine to frailty, an earlier stage of disability still reversible. Its particularity is that it is intended for a single target population that really needs preventive measures: the frail elderly screened by physicians. The screening undergone by physicians was really effective because 93.6% of the subjects who referred to this structure were frail or pre-frail according to Fried's classification and needed different medical interventions. The creation of units like the G.F.C, specialized in evaluation, management and prevention of disability in frail population, could be an interesting option to support general practitioners, promote the quality of life of older people and increase life expectancy without disability.