2
EDITORIALS Frailty: Toward a Clinical Definition Gabor Abellan van Kan, MD, Yves M. Rolland, MD, John E. Morley, MB, BCh, and Bruno Vellas, MD While most clinicians believe they can recognize a frail older person, there is a lack of consensus as to what defines frailty and how it should be diagnosed clinically. 1,2 For this reason, a Geriatric Advisory Panel of the International Acad- emy of Nutrition and Aging has postulated a new approach to defining frailty and a case-finding tool. 3 The major agreement of the group was that for frailty to be a useful clinical condi- tion, it should be considered a predisability state. They stressed that, conceptually, frailty should exclude persons with disability (ie, physical impairment that interferes with the ability to perform activities of daily living). Most definitions of frailty have considered it to be a state where there is increased vulnerability to stressors. 1,4,5,6 When a frail individual is exposed to a stressor, it is postulated that they are at increased risk of developing disability or other adverse outcomes (like death, hospitalization, or institution- alization). Thus, the frailty syndrome is part of a continuum situated between the normal physiological changes of aging and the final state of disability and death. Commonly used definitions of frailty include the Fried criteria. 7 These criteria, which have been widely embraced, include exhaustion (fatigue), weight loss, measured grip strength and walking speed, and low energy expenditure. The lack of standards for some of the measurements, the difficulty in performing these tests in frail older persons especially in the nursing home, 8 and the failure of this group to exclude dis- ability have limited the incorporation of these evidence-based criteria into general clinical practice. Rockwood and colleagues 9 have created a frailty index based on disability and illnesses. It appears to be predictive of death and institutionalization. 10 It may also predict poor outcomes in the nursing home. The Short Physical Performance Battery (gait speed, re- peated chair stands, and tandem balance) was found to be predictive of disability in nondisabled community living el- derly. 11 Rolland et al 12 confirmed the utility of this approach in the EPIDOS study. The Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA) has been used in clinical practice to assess nutritional status. 13 Given the importance of weight loss as a marker for future disability, hip fracture, institutionalization, and death, it would appear that persons who are identified at nutritional risk by the MNA can be considered to be frail. 14 –19 Based on these definitions, the Geriatric Advisory Panel felt that while a clear definition of frailty is not at this stage of research easily created, it would be highly useful to develop a small screening tool to identify persons at risk for frailty. Such a tool should be easily utilizable by physicians in practice and require a minimum time for administration. Ideally, it could also be administered by other health professionals or even caregivers. To this end, they proposed the “FRAIL” scale, which consists of 5 domains (Table 1). Validation of this simple approach is still required. The panel felt that those who screened positive by this scale would then be suitable candidates to undergo a compre- hensive geriatric assessment and targeted intervention to pre- vent the frailty-associated adverse outcomes. 20 –22 With tools such as these available, the panel felt it would become easier to untangle the complex physiopathological pathways leading to frailty. This would allow the study of the interaction of factors that seem to synergistically lead to frailty such as anemia, 23,24 orthostasis, 25 weight loss, 26 sarcope- nia, 27–29 polypharmacy, 30,31 congestive heart failure, 32,33 diabetes mellitus, 34 –36 osteopenia, 37,38 hypovitaminosis D, 39–41 testosterone deficiency, 42– 44 cytokine excess, 45– 47 low-protein diets, 48 and decline in executive function. 49,50 We believe that identification of frail older persons at high risk for further deterioration represents a major step forward in allowing clinicians to provide high-quality care for this vul- nerable population. The “FRAIL” screening scale will allow rapid identification of these persons with subsequent targeted intervention. It would also allow an independent method to evaluate quality indicators such as those proposed by As- sessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE). 51,52 Department of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital of Toulouse, INSERM U558 University of Toulouse III, Toulouse, France (G.A.v.K., Y.R., B. Vellas); GRECC, VA Medical Center and Division of Geriatric Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO (J.E.M.). The authors have no conflicts of interest in regards to this article. Address correspondence to John E. Morley, MB, BCh, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, 1402 S. Grand Blvd., M238, St. Louis, MO 63104. E-mail: [email protected] Published by Elsevier, Inc on behalf of the American Medical Directors Association DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2007.11.005 Table 1. The “FRAIL” Scale Fatigue Resistance (ability to climb 1 flight of stairs) Ambulation (ability to walk 1 block) Illnesses (greater than 5) Loss of Weight (5%) EDITORIALS van Kan et al 71

Frailty: Toward a Clinical Definition

  • Upload
    bruno

  • View
    213

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Frailty: Toward a Clinical Definition

EDITORIALS

Frailty: Toward a Clinical Definition

Gabor Abellan van Kan, MD, Yves M. Rolland, MD, John E. Morley, MB, BCh, and Bruno Vellas, MD

While most clinicians believe they can recognize a frailolder person, there is a lack of consensus as to what definesfrailty and how it should be diagnosed clinically.1,2 For thisreason, a Geriatric Advisory Panel of the International Acad-emy of Nutrition and Aging has postulated a new approach todefining frailty and a case-finding tool.3 The major agreementof the group was that for frailty to be a useful clinical condi-tion, it should be considered a predisability state. Theystressed that, conceptually, frailty should exclude persons withdisability (ie, physical impairment that interferes with theability to perform activities of daily living).

Most definitions of frailty have considered it to be a statewhere there is increased vulnerability to stressors.1,4,5,6 Whena frail individual is exposed to a stressor, it is postulated thatthey are at increased risk of developing disability or otheradverse outcomes (like death, hospitalization, or institution-alization). Thus, the frailty syndrome is part of a continuumsituated between the normal physiological changes of agingand the final state of disability and death.

Commonly used definitions of frailty include the Friedcriteria.7 These criteria, which have been widely embraced,include exhaustion (fatigue), weight loss, measured gripstrength and walking speed, and low energy expenditure. Thelack of standards for some of the measurements, the difficultyin performing these tests in frail older persons especially in thenursing home,8 and the failure of this group to exclude dis-ability have limited the incorporation of these evidence-basedcriteria into general clinical practice.

Rockwood and colleagues9 have created a frailty indexbased on disability and illnesses. It appears to be predictive ofdeath and institutionalization.10 It may also predict pooroutcomes in the nursing home.

The Short Physical Performance Battery (gait speed, re-peated chair stands, and tandem balance) was found to bepredictive of disability in nondisabled community living el-

Department of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospital of Toulouse, INSERMU558 University of Toulouse III, Toulouse, France (G.A.v.K., Y.R., B. Vellas);GRECC, VA Medical Center and Division of Geriatric Medicine, Saint LouisUniversity School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO (J.E.M.).

The authors have no conflicts of interest in regards to this article.

Address correspondence to John E. Morley, MB, BCh, Division of GeriatricMedicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, 1402 S. Grand Blvd.,M238, St. Louis, MO 63104. E-mail: [email protected]

Published by Elsevier, Inc on behalf of the American Medical DirectorsAssociation

DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2007.11.005

EDITORIALS

derly.11 Rolland et al12 confirmed the utility of this approachin the EPIDOS study.

The Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA) has been usedin clinical practice to assess nutritional status.13 Given theimportance of weight loss as a marker for future disability, hipfracture, institutionalization, and death, it would appear thatpersons who are identified at nutritional risk by the MNA canbe considered to be frail.14 –19

Based on these definitions, the Geriatric Advisory Panel feltthat while a clear definition of frailty is not at this stage ofresearch easily created, it would be highly useful to develop asmall screening tool to identify persons at risk for frailty. Such atool should be easily utilizable by physicians in practice andrequire a minimum time for administration. Ideally, it could alsobe administered by other health professionals or even caregivers.To this end, they proposed the “FRAIL” scale, which consists of5 domains (Table 1). Validation of this simple approach is stillrequired. The panel felt that those who screened positive by thisscale would then be suitable candidates to undergo a compre-hensive geriatric assessment and targeted intervention to pre-vent the frailty-associated adverse outcomes.20 –22

With tools such as these available, the panel felt it wouldbecome easier to untangle the complex physiopathologicalpathways leading to frailty. This would allow the study of theinteraction of factors that seem to synergistically lead to frailtysuch as anemia,23,24 orthostasis,25 weight loss,26 sarcope-nia,27–29 polypharmacy,30,31 congestive heart failure,32,33

diabetes mellitus,34 –36 osteopenia,37,38 hypovitaminosisD,39 – 41 testosterone deficiency,42– 44 cytokine excess,45– 47

low-protein diets,48 and decline in executive function.49,50

We believe that identification of frail older persons at highrisk for further deterioration represents a major step forward inallowing clinicians to provide high-quality care for this vul-nerable population. The “FRAIL” screening scale will allowrapid identification of these persons with subsequent targetedintervention. It would also allow an independent methodto evaluate quality indicators such as those proposed by As-

Table 1. The “FRAIL” Scale

FatigueResistance (ability to climb 1 flight of stairs)Ambulation (ability to walk 1 block)Illnesses (greater than 5)Loss of Weight (�5%)

sessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE).51,52

van Kan et al 71

Page 2: Frailty: Toward a Clinical Definition

REFERENCES1. Morley JE, Kim MJ, Haren MT, et al. Frailty and the aging male. Aging

Male 2005;8:135–140.2. Morley JE, Haren MT, Rolland Y, Kim MJ. Frailty. Med Clin North Am

2006;90:837–847.3. Abellan van Kan G, Rolland Y, Bergman H, et al. Frailty assessment of

older people in clinical practice expert opinion of a geriatric advisorypanel. J Nutr Health Aging 2008;12:29–37.

4. Morley JE, Perry HM III, Miller DK. Something about frailty. J GerontolA Biol Sci Med Sci 2002;57A:698–704.

5. Walston J, Hadley EC, Ferrucci L, et al. Research agenda for frailty inolder adults: Towards a better understanding of physiology and etiology:Summary from the American Geriatrics Society/National Institute onAging Research conference on frailty in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc2006;54:991–1001.

6. Rockwood K. Frailty and its definition: A worthy challenge. J AmGeriatr Soc 2005;53:1069–1070.

7. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al; for the Cardiovascular HealthStudy Collaborative Research Group. Frailty in older adults: evidence fora phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56A:M146–M156.

8. Thomas DR, Marren K, Banks W, Morley J. Do objective measurementsof physical function in ambulatory nursing home women improve assess-ment of functional status? J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8:469–476.

9. Rockwood K, Stadnyk K, MacKnight C, et al. A brief clinical instrumentto classify frailty in elderly people. Lancet 1999;353:205–206.

10. Rockwood K, Abeysundera MJ, Mitnitski A. How should we grade frailtyin nursing home patients? J Am Medical Dir Assoc 2007;8:595–603.

11. Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Simonsick EM, et al. Lower-extremity functionin persons over the age of 70 years as a predictor of subsequent disability.N Engl J Med 1995;332:556–561.

12. Rolland Y, Lauwers-Cances V, Cesari M, et al. Physical performancemeasures as predictors of mortality in a cohort of community-dwellingolder French women. Eur J Epidemiol 2006;21:113–122.

13. Vellas B, Villars H, Abellan G, et al. Overview of the MNA—its historyand challenges. J Nutr Health Aging 2006;10:456–463.

14. Kalantar-Zadeh K, Horwich TB, Oreopoulos A, et al. Risk factor paradoxin wasting diseases. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2007;10:433–442.

15. Morley JE. Weight loss in the nursing home. J Am Med Dir Assoc2007;8:201–204.

16. Morley JE. Is weight loss harmful to older men? Aging Male 2006;9:135–137.

17. Rolland Y, Kim MJ, Gammack JK, et al. Office management of weightloss in older persons. Am J Med 2006;119:1019–1026.

18. Yeh SS, Lovitt S, Schuster MW. Pharmacological treatment of geriatriccachexia: Evidence and safety in perspective. J Am Med Dir Assoc2007;8:363–377.

19. Aoyama L, Weintraub N, Reuben DB. Is weight loss in the nursing homea reversible problem? J Am Med Dir Assoc 2006;7(3 Suppl):S66–S72.

20. Rubenstein LZ, Joseph T. Freeman award lectures: Comprehensive geri-atric assessment: From miracle to reality. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci2004;59:473–477.

21. Rubenstein LZ, Harker J, Guigoz Y, Vellas B. Comprehensive geriatricassessment (CGA) and the MNA: an overview of CGA, nutritionalassessment, and development of a shortened version of the MNA. NestleNutr Workshop Ser Clin Perform Programme 1999;1:101–115.

22. Stuck AE, Siu AL, Wieland GD, et al. Comprehensive geriatric assess-ment: A meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet 1993;342:1032–1036.

23. Landi F, Russo A, Danese P, et al. Anemia status, hemoglobin concen-tration, and mortality in nursing home older residents. J Am Med DirAssoc 2007;8:322–327.

24. Dharmarajan TS, Avula S, Norkus EP. Anemia increases risk for falls inhospitalized older adults: An evaluation of falls in 362 hospitalized,ambulatory, long-term care, and community patients. J Am Med Dir

Assoc 2007;8(3 Suppl 2):e9–e15.

72 van Kan et al

25. Iwanczyk L, Weintraub NT, Rubenstein LZ. Orthostatic hypotension inthe nursing home setting. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2006;7:163–167.

26. Morley JE. Decreased food intake with aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci MedSci 2001;56(Spec No 2):81–88.

27. Morley JE. Anorexia, sarcopenia, and aging. Nutrition 2001;17:660–663.28. Morley JE, Baumgartner RN, Roubenoff R, Mayer J, Nair KS. Sarcope-

nia. J Lab Clin Med 2001;137:231–243.29. Roubenoff R. Sarcopenia: Effects on body composition and function. J

Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2003;58:1012–1017.30. Takahashi PY, North F. Pilot study of inappropriate medications and

balance: A study in a continuous care center. J Am Med Dir Assoc2007;8:545.

31. Levenson SA, Saffel DA. The consultant pharmacist and the physicianin the nursing home: Roles, relationships, and a recipe for success. J AmMed Dir Assoc 2007;8:55–64.

32. Messinger-Rapport BJ, Morley JE, Thomas DR, Gammack JK. Intensivesession: New approaches to medical issues in long-term care. J Am MedDir Assoc 2007;8:421–433.

33. Aronow WS. Treatment of systolic and diastolic heart failure in theelderly. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2006;7:29–36.

34. Meyers RM, Broton JC, Woo-Rippe KW, et al. Variability in glycosy-lated hemoglobin values in diabetic patients living in long-term carefacilities. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8:511–514.

35. Mazza AD, Morley JE. Update on diabetes in the elderly and the applicationof current therapeutics. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8:489–492.

36. Kim MJ, Rolland Y, Cepeda O, et al. Diabetes mellitus in older men.Aging Male 2006;9:139–147.

37. Kamel HK. Update on osteoporosis management in long-term care:Focus on bisphosphonates. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8:434–440.

38. Duque G, Mallet L, Roberts A, et al. To treat or not to treat, that is thequestion: Proceedings of the Quebec symposium for the treatment ofosteoporosis in long-term care institutions, Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec,November 5, 2004. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8(3 Suppl 2):e67–e73.

39. Munir J, Wright RJ, Carr DB. A quality improvement study on calciumand vitamin D supplementation in long-term care. J Am Med Dir Assoc2007;8(3 Suppl 2):e19–e23.

40. Morley JE. Should all long-term care residents receive vitamin D? J AmMed Dir Assoc 2007;8:69–70.

41. Drinka PJ, Krause PF, Next LJ, Goodman BM. Determinants of vitaminD levels in nursing home residents. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8:76–79.

42. Lunenfeld B, Nieschlag E. Testosterone therapy in the aging male. AgingMale 2007;10:139–153.

43. Morley JE. Androgens and aging. Maturitas 2001;38:61–71.44. Köhn FM. Testosterone and body functions. Aging Male 2006;9:183–188.45. Morley JE, Baumgartner RN. Cytokine-related aging process. J Gerontol

A Biol Sci Med Sci 2004;59:M924–M929.46. Schiffrin EJ, Thomas Dr, Kumar VB, et al. Systemic inflammatory mark-

ers in older persons. The effect of oral nutritional supplementation withprebiotics. J Nutr Health Aging 2007;11:475–479.

47. Morley JE, Thomas DR, Wilson MM. Cachexia: Pathophysiology andclinical relevance. Am J Clin Nutr 2006;83:735–743.

48. Campbell WW. Synergistic use of higher-protein diets or nutritionalsupplements with resistance training to counter sarcopenia. Nutr Rev2007;65:416–422.

49. van der Steen JT, Mitchell SL, Frijters DH, et al. Prediction of 6-monthmortality in nursing home residents with advanced dementia: Validity ofa risk score. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2007;8:464–468.

50. Joshi S, Morley JE. Cognitive impairment. Med Clin North Am 2006;90:769–787.

51. Wenger NS, Roth CP, Shekelle P, ACOVE Investigators. Introductionto the assessing care of vulnerable elders—3 quality indicator measure-ment set. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007;55(Suppl 2):S247–S252.

52. Morley JE. Caring for the vulnerable elderly: Are available quality

indicators appropriate? J Am Med Dir Assoc 2008;9:1–3.

JAMDA – February 2008