Turkish translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability of the Groningen Frailty Indicator.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is an important geriatric syndrome that can be seen as a way of recognizing and distinguishing the complex health conditions of older people. Due to the time limitation, short and simple instruments are most feasible in clinical practice, and several quick screening tools have been developed and validated, Groningen frailty indicator (GFI) is one of these scales. We aimed to validate and evaluate the reliability of the GFI in outpatient older adults in the Turkish population. METHODS: A total of 101 older patients were enrolled to the study. GFI was scored by a geriatrician for every patient at first admission to the geriatric outpatient clinic. Fried Physical Frailty Phenotype (FPFP) was performed as a reference test. RESULTS: The median age (IQR) was 72.0 (10.0) and 62.4% of the study population (n = 63) was female. Based on the GFI, 34 patients (33.7%) were defined as robust, and 67 patients (66.3%) were defined as living with frailty. There was a statistically significant concordance between GFI and FPFP (Cohen's kappa: 0.415 p < 0.001). GFI had excellent consistency in inter-rater reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.00) and in intra-rater reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.0). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that GFI is a valid and reliable scale in the Turkish older population.

Prevalence and risk factors of preoperative frailty in Chinese elderly inpatients with gastric and colorectal cancer undergoing surgery: a single-center cross-sectional study using the Groningen Frailty Indicator.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is emerging as an important determinant for health. Compared with Western countries, research in the field of frailty started at a later stage in China and mainly focused on older community dwellers. Little is known about frailty in Chinese cancer patients, nor the risk factors of frailty. This study aimed at investigating the prevalence of frailty and its risk factors in elderly inpatients with gastric and colorectal cancer. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in China from Mar. 2020 to Nov. 2020. The study enrolled 265 eligible inpatients aged 60 and older with gastric and colorectal cancer who underwent surgery. Demographic and clinical characteristics, biochemical laboratory parameters, and anthropometric data were collected from all patients. The Groningen Frailty Indicator was applied to assess the frailty status of patients. A multivariate logistic regression model analysis was performed to identify the risk factors of frailty and to estimate their 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The prevalence of frailty in elderly inpatients with gastric and colorectal cancer was 43.8%. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that older age (OR = 1.065, 95% CI: 1.001-1.132, P = 0.045), low handgrip strength (OR = 4.346, 95% CI: 1.739-10.863, P = 0.002), no regular exercise habit (OR = 3.228, 95% CI: 1.230-8.469, P = 0.017), and low MNA-SF score (OR = 11.090, 95% CI: 5.119-24.024, P < 0.001) were risk factors of frailty. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested a relatively high prevalence of frailty among elderly inpatients with gastric and colorectal cancer. Older age, low handgrip strength, no regular exercise habit, and low MNA-SF score were identified as risk factors of frailty.

Frailty and risk of hospitalization from COVID-19 infection among older adults: evidence from the Dutch Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with COVID-19 severity in clinical settings. No general population-based studies on the association between actual frailty status and COVID-19 hospitalization are available. AIMS: To investigate the association between frailty and the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization once infected. METHODS: 440 older adults who participated in the Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort study in the Northern Netherlands and reported positive COVID-19 testing results (54.2% women, age 70 ± 4 years in 2021) were included in the analyses. COVID-19 hospitalization status was self-reported. The Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) was derived from 15 self-reported questionnaire items related to daily activities, health problems, and psychosocial functioning, with a score ≥ 4 indicating frailty. Both frailty and COVID-19 hospitalization were assessed in the same period. Poisson regression models with robust standard errors were used to analyze the associations between frailty and COVID-19 hospitalization. RESULTS: Of 440 older adults included, 42 were hospitalized because of COVID-19 infection. After adjusting for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors, a higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization was observed for frail individuals (risk ratio (RR) [95% CI] 1.97 [1.06-3.67]) compared to those classified as non-frail. DISCUSSION: Frailty was positively associated with COVID-19 hospitalization once infected, independent of sociodemographic and lifestyle factors. Future research on frailty and COVID-19 should consider biomarkers of aging and frailty to understand the pathophysiological mechanisms and manifestations between frailty and COVID-19 outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was positively associated with the risk of hospitalization among older adults that were infected with COVID-19. Public health strategies for frailty prevention in older adults need to be advocated, as it is helpful to reduce the burden of the healthcare system, particularly during a pandemic like COVID-19.

Applicability of laboratory deficit-based frailty index in predominantly older patients with end-stage renal disease under chronic dialysis: A pilot test of its correlation with survival and self-reported instruments.

AIM: Laboratory deficit-based frailty index (LFI) exhibited outcome-prediction ability in the elderly, but not in those with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We hypothesized that LFI results might have outcome correlation and correlate closely with other instruments in ESRD patients. METHODS: We prospectively enroled ESRD patients between 2014 and 2015 and administered self-report frailty instruments (Strawbridge questionnaire, Edmonton frail scale (EFS), Groningen frailty indicator (GFI), Tilburg frailty indicator, G8 questionnaire and FRAIL scale), and Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS) scale, with two types of LFI calculated. They were followed up until June 30, 2017. Correlations between the results of six instruments, CHS scale, and those of LFI were identified, followed by Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and logistic regression analyses to compare those with high and low LFI. RESULTS: The frailty prevalence was 33.3% (CHS), 78.8% Strawbridge questionnaire, 45.5% (EFS), 57.6% (GFI), 27.3% (Tilburg frailty indicator), 84.8% (G8) and 18.2% (FRAIL) among ESRD participants. LFI-1 results were significantly correlated with those of LFI-2 (P < 0.01), EFS (P = 0.04) and GFI (P < 0.01), while LFI-2 results were not. Those with CHS or GFI-identified frailty had significantly lower 1,25-(OH)2 -D levels than those without. After 32.3 ± 5.4 months, patients with high LFI-1 scores, but not LFI-2, had a significantly higher mortality than those with lower scores. GFI and EFS scores were also independently associated with LFI-1, while CHS scores exhibited borderline association only. CONCLUSION: Among a group of predominantly older ESRD patients, LFI differentiates patients with good and poor outcomes, supporting its applicability in these patients.

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) among Chinese community-dwelling older adults.

The objective was to examine the feasibility, reliability and validity of the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) among Chinese community-dwelling older adults. Of the 1230 participants, 1202 (97.7%) completed all items on the GFI. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's α = 0.64), and the test-retest reliability within a 7-15-day interval was good (ICC = 0.87). The GFI showed good diagnostic accuracy in the identification of frailty with reference to the frailty index (AUC = 0.84), and the optimal frailty cut-point was 3. Convergent validity was supported by significant correlations between each domain of the GFI and the corresponding alternative measurement(s). Higher proportions of frailty (GFI ≥ 3) were found in those who were older, female, less-educated, lived alone, and had 2 or more chronic diseases than in their counterparts, supporting its known-group discriminant validity. The Chinese GFI has good feasibility, acceptable reliability and satisfactory validity among community-dwelling older adults.

Frailty in end-stage hip or knee osteoarthritis: validation of the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) questionnaire.

Frailty is highly prevalent in the elderly, increasing the risk of poor health outcomes. The Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) is a 15-item validated questionnaire for the elderly. Its value in patients with end-stage hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) has not yet been determined. This study assesses the validity of the GFI in this patient group. End-stage hip or knee OA patients completed the GFI (range 0-15, ≥ 4 = frail) before arthroplasty surgery. Convergent validity was determined by Spearman-rank correlation between the SF-12 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component scores and the physical and mental GFI-domains, respectively. Discriminant validity was assessed by means of overall GFI-score and the pain-domain of the Hip/Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS/KOOS). Altogether 3275 patients were included of whom 2957 (90.3%) completed the GFI. Mean GFI-scores were 2.78 (2.41) and 2.28 (1.99) in hip and knee OA-patients, respectively, with 570 (35.9%) of hip and 344 (24.1%) of knee patients considered frail. The convergent validity was moderate to strong (physical domain R = - 0.4, mental domain R = - 0.6) and discriminant validity low (R HOOS/KOOS-pain domain = - 0.2), confirming the validity of the GFI-questionnaire in this population. With 90% of participants completing the GFI, it is a feasible and valid questionnaire to assess frailty in end-stage hip and knee OA-patients. One-third (33.3%) of the patients undergoing hip arthroplasty and a quarter (24.1%) of those undergoing knee arthroplasty are frail. Whether this is associated with worse outcomes and can thus be used as a pre-operative predictor needs to be explored.

Frailty among Older People during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in The Netherlands.

Restrictive measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic may cause problems in the physical, social, and psychological functioning of older people, resulting in increased frailty. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to assess the prevalence and characteristics of frailty, to examine differences in perceived COVID-19-related concerns and threats between frail and non-frail people and to identify variables associated with frailty in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Dutch older people aged ≥ 65 years. We used data from the Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort Study. The Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) was used, with a score ≥ 4 indicating frailty. Frailty was described per domain (i.e., physical, cognitive, social, and psychological). The association between demographic, health and lifestyle variables and frailty was determined with logistic regression analyses. Frailty was present in 13% of the 11,145 participants that completed the GFI. Most items contributing to a positive frailty score were found within the social domain, in the frail (51%) and the non-frail (59%) persons. For items related to concerns and threats, a significantly higher proportion of frail people reported being worried or feeling threatened. In conclusion, during Corona restrictions, prevalence of frailty was considerable in older people from the Northern Netherlands, with one in eight being frail. Frailty was characterized by social problems and frail people were more often worried and felt threatened by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Evaluating the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the Groningen Frailty Indicator among Lebanese elderly people.

BACKGROUND: The levels of frailty are anticipated to increase as a result of population aging. A valid instrument is required to detect individuals at high risk of frailty. The present research aimed to assess feasibility, reliability, and construct validity of the Arabic version of Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) in urban and rural populations in South Lebanon. METHODS: During 2015, a cross-sectional study, which enrolled 390 community-dwelling individuals aged 65 years and above, was conducted in urban and rural areas in Nabatieh in South Lebanon. The survey included questions on sociodemographic and health-related characteristics, GFI, and Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13). The translation and cultural adaptation of the GFI followed a standardized protocol. After that, the psychometric properties of the scale (i.e., feasibility, reliability, and validity) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 390 elderly filled out the questionnaire, of whom 51% were women and 70% lived in rural areas. 81.3% of elderly were identified as frail. The internal consistency of the GFI scale was high for all subscales (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70), except the social scale (0.56). The GFI yielded statistically significant scores for subgroup analysis (known-groups validity) as higher levels of frailty were seen in older people, women, those with morbidities, and those reported poor financial status. The construct validity of the scale was supported by the significant correlation with the VES-13 (r = 0.73; p = 0.001), quality of life (r = - 0.22; p = 0.001), and self-reported health status (r = - 0.66; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study supports the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the GFI Arabic version as a screening tool for frailty among community-dwelling elderly in South Lebanon.

Frailty as a predictor of short-term adverse outcomes.

The objectives of this study were to compare how different frailty measures (Frailty Phenotype/FP, Groningen Frailty Indicator/GFI and Tilburg Frailty Indicator/TFI) predict short-term adverse outcomes. Secondarily, adopting a multidimensional approach to frailty (integral conceptual model-TFI), this study aims to compare how physical, psychological and social frailty predict the outcomes. A longitudinal study was carried out with 95 community-dwelling elderly. Participants were assessed at baseline for frailty, determinants of frailty, and adverse outcomes (healthcare utilization, quality of life, disability in basic and instrumental activities of daily living/ADL and IADL). Ten months later the outcomes were assessed again. Frailty was associated with specific healthcare utilization indicators: the FP with a greater utilization of informal care; GFI with an increased contact with healthcare professionals; and TFI with a higher amount of contacts with a general practitioner. After controlling for the effect of life-course determinants, comorbidity and adverse outcome at baseline, GFI predicted IADL disability and TFI predicted quality of life. The effect of the FP on the outcomes was not significant, when compared with the other measures. However, when comparing TFI's domains, the physical domain was the most significant predictor of the outcomes, even explaining part of the variance of ADL disability. Frailty at baseline was associated with adverse outcomes at follow-up. However, the relationship of each frailty measure (FP, GFI and TFI) with the outcomes was different. In spite of the role of psychological frailty, TFI's physical domain was the determinant factor for predicting disability and most of the quality of life.

Construct validity of the Groningen Frailty Indicator established in a large sample of home-dwelling elderly persons: Evidence of stability across age and gender.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of the present study was to evaluate the validity of the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) in a sample of Dutch elderly persons participating in LifeLines, a large population-based cohort study. Additional aims were to assess differences between frail and non-frail elderly and examine which individual characteristics were associated with frailty. METHODS: By December 2012, 5712 elderly persons were enrolled in LifeLines and complied with the inclusion criteria of the present study. Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess the variability of GFI-scores among elderly subgroups that differed in demographic characteristics, morbidity, obesity, and healthcare utilization. Within subgroups Kruskal-Wallis tests were also used to examine differences in GFI-scores across age groups. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to assess associations between individual characteristics and frailty. RESULTS: The GFI discriminated between subgroups: statistically significantly higher GFI-median scores (interquartile range) were found in e.g. males (1 [0-2]), the oldest old (2 [1-3]), in elderly who were single (1 [0-2]), with lower socio economic status (1 [0-3]), with increasing co-morbidity (2 [1-3]), who were obese (2 [1-3]), and used more healthcare (2 [1-4]). Overall age had an independent and statistically significant association with GFI scores. Compared with the non-frail, frail elderly persons experienced statistically significantly more chronic stress and more social/psychological related problems. In the multivariate logistic regression model, psychological morbidity had the strongest association with frailty. CONCLUSION: The present study supports the construct validity of the GFI and provides an insight in the characteristics of (non)frail community-dwelling elderly persons participating in LifeLines.

Geriatric screening results and the association with severe treatment toxicity after the first cycle of (radio)chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Screening tools are used in geriatric oncology to determine who should receive a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). However, in this prospective study, we evaluated the association between geriatric screening results, measured with the G8 and Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), and severe treatment toxicity. METHODS: Patients over 65 years with various types and stages of cancer were screened with the G8 and the GFI prior to the start of treatment. The association between geriatric screening results and Serious Adverse Events (SAE) after the first cycle of (radio)chemotherapy were studied with bivariate analysis (normal versus abnormal screening test) and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: From 170 screened patients, 85 patients were eligible for this study. The median age was 76 years (range: 66-88 years). The treatment intent was curative in 46% and palliative in 54%. A SAE occurred in 15 patients (18%) of which three resulted in death. There was no significant association between the G8, as a dichotomous predictor (p = 0.376) or as a continuous predictor (p = 0.298), and risk of a SAE. We also found no significant association for the GFI analysed as a dichotomous predictor (cut-off ≥4: p = 0.384; cut-off ≥3: p = 0.773), nor as a continuous predictor (p = 0.734). All associations remained insignificant when adjusted for treatment type and comorbidity. CONCLUSION: The G8 and the GFI can be used to select patients for CGA, but they do not seem to be predictive for short-term severe treatment toxicity.