There is a proved strong evidence of the usefulness of frailty as a predictive factor of relevant and desired outcomes in populations of older adults. Several studies have been published showing the utility of the concept in improving the prognosis accuracy and the prediction of different risks (hospitalisations, surgical and non surgical complications, length of stay, death, incident disability, etc.) in emergency departments, surgical patients, and inpatients with cardiovascular disease. The studies have placed the focus in assessing population risk, while the validation process for these instruments as diagnosis or screening tools has been usually neglected. FRAILTOOLS aims to assess the usefulness as screening and diagnosis tools of some selected instruments to detect frailty in both clinical (Hospital and Primary Care) and social (Nursing Homes) settings, providing diagnostic algorithms clinically sound. Target groups are all of those older adults at risk of frailty (pre-frail) plus those that are frail and are at risk for developing disability. According to the published prevalence of these two conditions, the target population concerned by this project represents around 40-50% of people older than 65, and 60-70% of people older than 75. Once determining the best tools of screening and diagnosis in different settings of care, investigators will research conclusions of these people wherever the level of care they need and currently use. The benefit will spend to the Health System and Social Care as it will provide validated instruments that are necessary to provide an appropriate care for older adults by means of a comprehensive, continued, coordinated and integrated care.
Quality assurance plan: According to the European's Commission guidelines, the procedure for quality control focuses on the deliverables revision and in the quality of each procedure. The deliverables will be sent to the Administrative committee. The administrative Committee, composed by the Project's Promoter and its associates, will assume the role as a quality manager. It includes the following tasks: Making sure of the monitoring of all of the changes in documentation. Making sure the activity's coordination and reports are completed according to an adequate quality and in an appropriate manner. Reviewing the contract deliverables. Monitoring and auditing the project's activities according to plan, making the specific revisions of the contractual deliverables, directed to the achievement of the established objectives. The electronic Case Report Form (eCRF) has been designed to capture all data required in the protocol. A unique eCRF will be completed for subject, taking into account the protection law in each country of the study.Subjects will be identified by a unique subject number (with key held by the relevant partner), so none identification card number will be recorded on the eCRF or the database. The monitor will guarantee that the eCRF is fully and correctly fill up according to the source documents. The researcher will assure that all data recorded in the eCRF coincide with the information recorded in the source documents. Plan for missing data to address situations where variables are reported as missing: The investigators will check the missing data in each eCRF and source documents. Statistical analysis: Investigator will assess the associations of each scale with the outcome for each setting and outcome through logistic regressions. First, investigators will compute the classification performance (sensitivity, specificity, Receptors Operational Curve (ROC), Area Under the Curve (AUC), predictive values, likelihood ratios) for each model. Second, investigators will study the feasibility of the models taking into account the time needed for the scale and the percentage of patients that can be assessed per case. Investigators will evaluate the sensitivity to change of the scales and the covariance of the scales with other measures as the SPPB through a mixed linear model. Sample Size: Participants will be recruited in Spain, Italy, France, United Kingdom and Poland. The total sample will be of 1.940 subjects. Each participating centre will have to recruit a total of 388 patients, corresponding to 97 subjects in each clinical setting by centre.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
1,940
Assessment of the tools as screening/diagnosis instruments in older adults attended in Primary Care. To build the integration of tools in algorithms to be used in each setting of care and along the settings to permit an integrated care in different conditions (isolated assessment or sequential assessment)
Hospital Universitario de Getafe
Getafe, Madrid, Spain
RECRUITINGMortality
data obtained from the official registration of the country of the corresponding partner. When not available, other methods will be used (asking to a proxy, calls to nursing homes, medical registries, etc.).
Time frame: 18 months
Functional disability
Defined as a loss of at least one point in the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB).
Time frame: 18 months
Disability to perform IADL
Defined as a loss of at least one point in the Lawton Index
Time frame: 18 months
Disability to perform BADL
Defined as a loss of at least one point in the Barthel Index.
Time frame: 18 months
Falls
Data will be collected by the participant's verbal recall (self-assessed) and will be registered in the electronic Case Report Form (eCRF).
Time frame: 18 months
Incident cognitive impairment
Defined by a reduction of 2 or more points in the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).
Time frame: 18 months
Frailty classification performance
Performance of the instruments by clinical setting: six frailty assessment tools will be used in four different levels of care. The performance of each scale in the classification of frailty will be established.
Time frame: 18 months
Tool feasibility
Composed by two main conditions: the percentage of people that are assessed by each tool in each setting (adequacy) and the time for carrying out the the tool assessment.
Time frame: 18 months
Sensitivity to change in frailty status
Evaluate the changes in the assessment level of patients observed at 12 and 18 months with each of the tools and their correlations with the changes observed in the patient´s functional status.
Time frame: 18 months
Qualification as a screening and/or diagnosis tool
Evaluate the utility of each scale as a frailty detection method for screening or diagnosis, using pre-established criteria.
Time frame: 18 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.