TY - JOUR
T1 - Not All Frailty Assessments Are Created Equal
T2 - Comparability of Electronic Health Data-Based Frailty Assessments in Assessing Older People in Residential Care
AU - Kong, Jonathan
AU - Trinh, Kelly
AU - Hammill, Kathrine
AU - Chia-Ming Chen, Carla
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/10
Y1 - 2024/10
N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the comparability of frailty assessment tools – the electronic frailty index (eFI), retrospective electronic frailty index (reFI), and clinical frailty scale (CFS) – in older residents of care facilities. Methods: Data from 813 individuals aged 65 or older, with frailty and co-morbidities, collected between 2022 and 2023, were analysed using various statistical methods. Results: The results showed significant differences in frailty classification among the tools: 78.3% were identified as moderately to severely frail by eFI, 59.6% by reFI, and 92.1% by CFS. Statistical tests confirmed significant differences (p <.05) in their assessments, indicating variability in measurement methods. Discussion: This study advances the understanding of frailty assessment within aged-care settings, highlighting the differences in the efficacy of these assessment tools. It underscores the challenges in frailty assessments and emphasizes the need for continuous refinement of assessment methods to address the diverse facets of frailty in aged care.
AB - Objectives: To evaluate the comparability of frailty assessment tools – the electronic frailty index (eFI), retrospective electronic frailty index (reFI), and clinical frailty scale (CFS) – in older residents of care facilities. Methods: Data from 813 individuals aged 65 or older, with frailty and co-morbidities, collected between 2022 and 2023, were analysed using various statistical methods. Results: The results showed significant differences in frailty classification among the tools: 78.3% were identified as moderately to severely frail by eFI, 59.6% by reFI, and 92.1% by CFS. Statistical tests confirmed significant differences (p <.05) in their assessments, indicating variability in measurement methods. Discussion: This study advances the understanding of frailty assessment within aged-care settings, highlighting the differences in the efficacy of these assessment tools. It underscores the challenges in frailty assessments and emphasizes the need for continuous refinement of assessment methods to address the diverse facets of frailty in aged care.
KW - aged care
KW - assessment
KW - electronic health records
KW - frailty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85193058314&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/10998004241254459
DO - 10.1177/10998004241254459
M3 - Article
C2 - 38739714
AN - SCOPUS:85193058314
SN - 1099-8004
VL - 26
SP - 526
EP - 536
JO - Biological Research for Nursing
JF - Biological Research for Nursing
IS - 4
ER -