Abstract
Purpose: To demonstrate the lack of consensual frailty language by linking the existing frailty instruments to the universal language of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
Methods: PubMed, Web of Knowledge and PsycINFO were screened for relevant papers on frailty instruments using the keywords ‘aged, frail elderly, frailty, diagnosis, risk assessment, classification’. Their items were then linked to the ICF codes via the ICF linking rules of Cieza ea. (2005).
Results: 1,984 potential articles were retrieved from which 67 relevant papers were retained and included in the systematic review. This search identified 79 original or adapted frailty instruments, 2 of which were not sufficiently described to be included in further analysis. 25 instruments are single-domain (only physical component or co-morbidities) while 52 are multi-domain (physical, functional, cognitive, medical and/or psychosocial components). With the exception of Gill Frailty Index and Timed Up and Go, all frailty instruments include items linked to the ICF component Body Functions (primarily chapters 1 Mental functions and 4 Functions of the cardiovascular, haematological, immunological and respiratory systems). All instruments except mSOF have items linked to the ICF component Activities and Participation (mainly Chapters 4 Mobility and 5 Self-care). However, the ICF components Environmental and Personal factors were only represented in the multi-domain frailty instruments. Merely 5 multi-domain instruments assess all 5 ICF components.
Conclusions: The ICF can potentially act as a framework for the standardisation of frailty language, and points to gaps in the current frailty instruments with respect to important health-related factors.
Methods: PubMed, Web of Knowledge and PsycINFO were screened for relevant papers on frailty instruments using the keywords ‘aged, frail elderly, frailty, diagnosis, risk assessment, classification’. Their items were then linked to the ICF codes via the ICF linking rules of Cieza ea. (2005).
Results: 1,984 potential articles were retrieved from which 67 relevant papers were retained and included in the systematic review. This search identified 79 original or adapted frailty instruments, 2 of which were not sufficiently described to be included in further analysis. 25 instruments are single-domain (only physical component or co-morbidities) while 52 are multi-domain (physical, functional, cognitive, medical and/or psychosocial components). With the exception of Gill Frailty Index and Timed Up and Go, all frailty instruments include items linked to the ICF component Body Functions (primarily chapters 1 Mental functions and 4 Functions of the cardiovascular, haematological, immunological and respiratory systems). All instruments except mSOF have items linked to the ICF component Activities and Participation (mainly Chapters 4 Mobility and 5 Self-care). However, the ICF components Environmental and Personal factors were only represented in the multi-domain frailty instruments. Merely 5 multi-domain instruments assess all 5 ICF components.
Conclusions: The ICF can potentially act as a framework for the standardisation of frailty language, and points to gaps in the current frailty instruments with respect to important health-related factors.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Publication status | Published - 2016 |
| Event | 39th Wintermeeting - Oostende, Belgium Duration: 26 Feb 2016 → 27 Feb 2016 |
Conference
| Conference | 39th Wintermeeting |
|---|---|
| Country/Territory | Belgium |
| City | Oostende |
| Period | 26/02/16 → 27/02/16 |