Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep 25;75(10):1928-1934.
doi: 10.1093/gerona/glaa084.

Exploring Clinically Meaningful Changes for the Frailty Index in a Longitudinal Cohort of Hospitalized Older Patients

Olga Theou  1   2   3 , Alexandra M van der Valk  3 , Judith Godin  2   3 , Melissa K Andrew  2   3 , Janet E McElhaney  4 , Shelly A McNeil  5 , Kenneth Rockwood  2   3
Affiliations

Exploring Clinically Meaningful Changes for the Frailty Index in a Longitudinal Cohort of Hospitalized Older Patients

Olga Theou et al. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Clinically meaningful change (CMC) for frailty index (FI) scores is little studied. We estimated the CMC by associating changes in FI scores with changes in the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in hospitalized patients.

Methods: The Serious Outcomes Surveillance Network of the Canadian Immunization Research Network enrolled older adults (65+ years) admitted to hospital with acute respiratory illness (mean age = 79.6 ± 8.4 years; 52.7% female). Patients were assigned CFS and 39-item FI scores in-person at admission and via telephone at 1-month postdischarge. Baseline frailty state was assessed at admission using health status 2 weeks before admission. We classified those whose CFS scores remained unchanged (n = 1,534) or increased (n = 4,390) from baseline to hospital admission, and whose CFS scores remained unchanged (n = 1,565) or decreased (n = 2,546) from admission to postdischarge. For each group, the CMC was represented as the FI score change value that best predicted one level CFS change, having the largest Youden J value in comparison to no change.

Results: From baseline to admission, 74.1% increased CFS by ≥1 level. From admission to postdischarge, 61.9% decreased CFS by ≥1 levels. A change in FI score of 0.03 best predicted both one-level CFS increase (sensitivity = 70%; specificity = 69%) and decrease (sensitivity = 66%; specificity = 61%) in comparison to no change. Of those who changed CFS by ≥1 levels, 70.9% (baseline to admission) and 72.4% (admission to postdischarge) changed their FI score by at least 0.03.

Conclusions: A clinically meaningful change of 0.03 in the frailty index score holds promise as a benchmark for assessing the meaningfulness of frailty interventions.

Keywords: Aging; Clinical frailty scale; Clinically meaningful change; Frailty index.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Mean FI change per level of CFS change. CFS = Clinical Frailty Scale; FI = Frailty Index.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013;381:752–762. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62167-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Apóstolo J, Cooke R, Bobrowicz-Campos E, et al. . Effectiveness of interventions to prevent pre-frailty and frailty progression in older adults. JBI Database Syst. 2018;16(1):140–232. doi:10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003382 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Morley JE, Vellas B, van Kan GA, et al. . Frailty consensus: a call to action. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013;14:392–397. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2013.03.022 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Searle SD, Mitnitski A, Gahbauer EA, Gill TM, Rockwood K. A standard procedure for creating a frailty index. BMC Geriatr. 2008;8:24. doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-8-24 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kojima G, Iliffe S, Walters K. Frailty index as a predictor of mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Age Ageing. 2018;47:193–200. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afx162 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding