Ressourcen und Risiken im Alter

Dapp, Ulrike; Anders, Jennifer; Golgert, Stefan; Renteln-Kruse, Wolfgang von; Minder, Christoph E.

doi:10.1007/s00391-012-0311-9

Cited by 28 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 51 frailty assessment instruments were analyzed in 96 studies published between 1997 and 2018. There were 82 studies published in English [18–99], 9 in Portuguese/BR [100–108], 3 in Japanese [109–111], 1 in Korean [112] and 1 in German [113]. The countries where the participants were most commonly sampled were the USA, with 14 studies [18, 21, 26, 49, 56, 61, 66, 70, 72, 77, 78, 86, 91, 95], Brazil, with 11 studies [64, 83, 92, 100–108], Canada, also with 11 studies [20, 22–24, 39, 54, 71, 80, 93, 94] and the Netherlands with 8 publications [28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 40, 55, 79, 96].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the duration, some of the instruments were of rapid application (up to 10 minutes), while in some the evaluations are performed in more than one stage, which can last several hours. It should be noted that the majority of the publications did not report the application time [20, 22, 23, 29, 32, 36–38, 41–46, 49, 53, 55, 57–59, 63, 64, 66, 68, 69, 93, 97, 109–113].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the domains present in the frailty assessment instruments, 22 (11- point FI [77], 5-item mFI [95], Continuous Frailty Scale–CFS [91], electronic Frailty Index–eFI [58], Emergency General Surgeries Frailty Index–EGS-FI [61], FiND–Frail Non-Disabled [42], FRAIL Scale [53], Frailty Phenotype [70], Frailty Phenotype Modified [35], Frailty Screening Questionnaire (FSQ) [99], Frailty Trait Scale–FTS [44], Instrumento Multidimensional de Rastreio da Síndrome da Fragilidade –IMSIFI [101], INTER-FRAIL Study Questionnaire [43], LUCAS [113], Modelo Fried adaptado [106], Motor Performance Tests [64], PRISMA-7 [96], Self-Report Frailty Instrument [31], SHARE Frailty Instrument [74], SHARE Frailty Instrument 75+ [48], SOF Frailty Criteria [72], Trauma-Specific Frailty Index (TSFI) [78], UEF Frailty [56]) evaluated only physical aspects such as: slowness, weakness, inactivity, exhaustion, mobility, morbidities, activities of daily living (ADL), instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), functional capacity, signs and symptoms, laboratory exams, balance, gait, muscular strength, resistance, fatigue, physical activity, muscle mass index (MMI), sphincter control, weight loss, pain, falls, communication (vision, hearing), flexibility, hospitalization and use of medications.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Instruments for the detection of frailty syndrome in older adults: A systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frailty is a dynamic process in which there is a reduction in the physical, psychological and/or social function associated with aging. The aim of this study was to identify instruments for the detection of frailty in older adults, characterizing their components, application scenarios, ability to identify pre-frailty and clinimetric properties evaluated. The study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), under registration number CRD42017039318. A total of 14 electronic sources were searched to identify studies that investigated instruments for the detection of frailty or that presented the construction and/or clinimetric evaluation of the instrument, according to criteria established by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). 96 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis: 51 instruments for the detection of frailty were identified, with predominantly physical domains; 40 were constructed and/or validated for use in the older adult community population, 28 only highlighted the distinction between frail and non-frail individuals and 23 presented three or more levels of frailty. The FRAGIRE, FRAIL Scale, Edmonton Frail Scale and IVCF-20 instruments were the most frequently analyzed in relation to clinimetric properties. It was concluded that: (I) there is a large number of instruments for measuring the same construct, which makes it difficult for researchers and clinicians to choose the most appropriate; (II) the FRAGIRE and CFAI stand out due to their multidimensional aspects, including an environmental assessment; however, (III) the need for standardization of the scales was identified, since the use of different instruments in clinical trials may prevent the comparability of the results in systematic reviews and; (IV) considering the different instruments identified in this review, the choice of researchers/clinicians should be guided by the issues related to the translation and validation for their location and the suitability for their context.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Instruments for the detection of frailty syndrome in older adults: A systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both, risk factors and resources were included equally in the FA index (questions see Table 1 ): First, we operationalized the frailty phenotype “weight loss, slow gait, weakness, exhaustion, reduced physical activity” [ 4 ] plus “instability/falls” [ 28 ]. The following resources were included: good endurance, frequent outside walking, moderate/strenuous sports or recreation, regular volunteer or paid work, and no limitation of activity due to fear of falling [ 29 ], i.e. we modified the Fried criteria.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term prediction of changes in health status, frailty, nursing care and mortality in community-dwelling senior citizens - results from the longitudinal urban cohort ageing study (LUCAS)

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe detection of incipient functional decline in elderly persons is not an easy task. Here, we propose the self-reporting Functional Ability Index (FA index) suitable to screen functional competence in senior citizens in the community setting. Its prognostic validity was investigated in the Longitudinal Urban Cohort Ageing Study (LUCAS).MethodsThis index is based equally on both, resources and risks/functional restrictions which precede ADL limitations. Since 2001, the FA index was tested in the LUCAS cohort without any ADL restrictions at baseline (n = 1,679), and followed up by repeated questionnaires in Hamburg, Germany.ResultsApplying the index, 1,022 LUCAS participants were initially classified as Robust (60.9%), 220 as postRobust (13.1%), 172 as preFrail (10.2%) and 265 as Frail (15.8%). This classification correlated with self-reported health, chronic pain and depressive mood (rank correlations 0.42, 0.26, 0.21; all p < .0001). Survival analyses showed significant differences between these classes as determined by the FA index: the initially Robust survived longest, the Frail shortest (p < .0001). Analyses of the time to need of nursing care revealed similar results. Significant differences persisted after adjustment for age, sex and self-reported health.ConclusionsDisability free lifetime and its development over time are important topics in public health. In this context, the FA index presented here provides answers to two questions. First, how to screen the heterogeneous population of community-dwelling senior citizens, i.e. for their functional ability/competence, and second, how far away they are from disability/dependency. Furthermore, the index provides a tool to address the urgent question whether incipient functional decline/incipient frailty can be recognized early to be influenced positively.The FA index predicted change in functional status, future need of nursing care, and mortality in an unselected population of community-dwelling seniors. It implies an operational specification of the classification into Robust, postRobust, preFrail and Frail. Based on a self-administered questionnaire, the FA index allows easy screening of elderly persons for declining functional competence. Thereby, incipient functional decline is recognized, e.g. in GPs’ practices and senior community health centers, to initiate early appropriate preventive action.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2318-14-141) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Tabela 6.1 -Descrição dos instrumentos identificados na revisão e suas características: número de itens, domínios, cenário de aplicação, idioma, local do estudo, tipo de mensuração da escala, verificação da pré-fragilidade e predição de mortalidade. (continua) CAPACIDADE DO INSTRUMENTO DE IDENTIFICAR A PRÉ-FRAGILIDADE Vinte e três instrumentos apresentaram níveis de fragilidade que variaram de três a seis9,32,48,78,[81][82][83]86,88,93,94,99,110,115,122,125,127,150,153,155,160,165,166 . Esses níveis classificaram os participantes da seguinte forma: idoso robusto ou não frágil, préfrágil ou aparentemente vulnerável, fragilidade leve, moderada ou severa, com base em uma pontuação numérica (Tabela 6.1).…”

unclassified

Identificação da fragilidade em idosos em região de tríplice fronteira: estratégia para a promoção do envelhecimento ativo

Faller¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A todos os idosos (as) que tive a honra de conhecer, em especial àqueles se propuseram a participar desta pesquisa;Aos idosos da minha família, exemplos de garra e perseverança;Aos meus pais, pelo incentivo e apoio à educação; Aos meus amores de longas vidas, Marcus Vinicius, Arthur e Bernardo.Com vocês, tudo vale a pena! 6 AGRADECIMENTOS Esta tese é fruto de encontros e compartilhamentos com muitos idosos ao longo de minha vida, os quais contribuíram, direta ou indiretamente, para a minha trajetória de estudos.Muita gratidão a todos! Gratidão eterna aos meus pais, que me deram a vida, me encaminharam aos caminhos mais seguros, conduzindo-me e apoiando-me, próximos ou distantes geograficamente, mas sempre presentes. Gratidão à minha avó, por quem sinto o amor mais puro e profundo, difícil até mesmo de explicar. A ela, que foi ombro, colo e afago, olhar e pensamento, consolo e orientação, meus profundos agradecimentos. Você é e será sempre, minha idosa do coração! À minha alma gêmea, se assim posso dizer, meu esposo. Juntos, concluímos mais esta etapa. Receba meu amor, admiração e gratidão, pela compreensão e apoio incansável ao longo do período de elaboração deste estudo. Sempre vencemos juntos e, por isso, este trabalho também é seu! Aos meus filhos, seres que Deus me concedeu o dever de guiar. Doeu a distância, a ausência, mas vocês puderam perceber, ao longo desta trajetória, que os frutos só chegam à mesa se houver plantio, terra fértil e cuidado e, após isso, alguém que cuide da colheita. Estiveram vibrando e torcendo sempre, consolando às vezes, mas o amor sempre nos manteve unidos! À minha grande orientadora e mestre Silvia Matumoto, meu maior respeito e gratidão. Você me enxergava até onde meus olhos não podiam ver, trazia as palavras certas sem que eu solicitasse e tinha sempre os ouvidos a postos para escutar. Sua atuação como docente, pesquisadora, cuidadora e, sobretudo, como ser humano, será sempre o meu grande exemplo! A todos os docentes do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Enfermagem em Saúde Pública, por tanto conhecimento técnico-científico transmitido. Em especial, ao Prof. Pedro Palha e Profª. Suzana Munhoz, que tanto trabalharam, junto com os docentes da Unioeste, para a concretização do Doutorado Interinstitucional (DINTER). À professora Fabiana de Souza Orlandi, que grande coração! Não sei como o destino planejou nosso encontro, mas sou grata por essa grande sorte que tive! Muito obrigada! 7 Ao professor Fernando Nampo, que aceitou caminhar comigo em uma pesquisa desafiadora. O que parecia quase impossível, diante dos meus conhecimentos àquela época, hoje temos concretizado. Gratidão! Ao professor Edgar Nunes de Moraes, que estendeu a mão sem nem me conhecer. Mostroume o desafio da Geriatria e ensinou-me que a vontade de mudar uma realidade permite que isso seja feito. Um grande entusiasta, podemos dizer, que nos contagia com seu ânimo, humor e, acima de tudo, grande conhecimento. Quando falava aos idosos, falava ao coração, compreendia e captava o que o outro dizia em meias palavras, preocupado...

show abstract

Ressourcen und Risiken im Alter

Abstract: The self-administered questionnaire provides a simple, cost-effective way to screen seniors for early signs of declining function in order to start preventive action.

Cited by 28 publications

References 19 publications

Instruments for the detection of frailty syndrome in older adults: A systematic review

Instruments for the detection of frailty syndrome in older adults: A systematic review

Long-term prediction of changes in health status, frailty, nursing care and mortality in community-dwelling senior citizens - results from the longitudinal urban cohort ageing study (LUCAS)

Identificação da fragilidade em idosos em região de tríplice fronteira: estratégia para a promoção do envelhecimento ativo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About