Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of two frailty measures in the Conselice Study of Brain Ageing

  • Published:
The journal of nutrition, health & aging

Abstract

Objectives

Uncertainty about the definition of frailty is reflected by the development of many ways to identify frail people. We aimed to compare the validity of two frailty measures in participants of the Conselice Study of Brain Aging.

Design

Prospective population-based study with 4 year follow up.

Participants/Setting

1,016 subjects aged 65 and over in a rural Italian population.

Methods

For each participant, a Frailty Index (FI) and a Conselice Study of Brain Aging Score (CSBAS) were determined. The FI was created from 43 deficits according to a standardized methodology; 7 variables derived from a previously validated Easy Prognostic Score comprised the CSBAS.

Results

The FI had characteristic properties described in other population samples, with a gamma distribution, a 99% limit of about 0.64 and higher values in women than men. CSBAS and FI were strongly correlated with each other (r = 0.72) and both correlated with age (r = 0.32, r = 0.27, respectively). Each was independently predictive of death in a multivariate model, with greater specificity and sensitivity than age alone.

Conclusions

Frailty can be measured by different tools and facilitates a more direct quantification of individual vulnerability than chronological age alone. Though the Frailty Index and the Conselice Study of Brain Aging Score are underpinned by different rationales, clinical utility will continue to motivate their development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pel Littel RE, Schuurmans MJ, Emmelot Vonk MH, Verhaar HJ. Frailty: defining and measuring of a concept. J Nutr Health Aging. 2009;13(4):390–394.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergman H, Ferrucci L, Guralnik J et al. Frailty: an emerging research and clinical paradigm—issues and controversies. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2007;62:731–737.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Izaks GJ, Westendorp RG. Ill or just old? Towards a conceptual framework of the relation between aging and disease. BMC Geriatrics 2003;3:7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Newman AB, Gottdiener JS, Mcburnie MA et al. Associations of subclinical cardiovascular disease with frailty. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56(3):M158–M166.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Abate M, Di Iorio A, Di Renzo D, Paganelli R, Saggini R, Abate G. Frailty in the elderly: The physical dimension. Eura Medicophys. 2007;43(3):407–415.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: Evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56(3):M146–M156.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chin A Paw MJ, Dekker JM, Feskens EJ, Schouten EG, Kromhout D. How to select a frail elderly population? A comparison of three working definitions. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52(11):1015–1021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Klein BE, Klein R, Knudtson MD, Lee KE. Frailty, morbidity and survival. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2005;41(2):141–149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Abellan van Kan G, Rolland YM, Morley JE, Vellas B. Frailty: Toward a clinical definition. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2008;9(2):71–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rolland Y, Lauwers-Cances V, Cesari M, Vellas B, Pahor M, Grandjean H. Physical performance measures as predictors of mortality in a cohort of community-dwelling older French women. Eur J Epidemiol. 2006;21(2):113–122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bauer JM, Sieber CC. Sarcopenia and frailty: a clinician’s controversial point of view. Exp Gerontol. 2008;43(7):674–678.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hogan DB, MacKnight C, Bergman H. Steering Committee, Canadian Initiative on Frailty and Aging. Models, definitions, and criteria of frailty. Aging-Clin Exp Res 2003;15(3 Suppl):1–29.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Studenski S, Hayes RP, Leibowitz RQ, Bode R, Lavery L, Walston J, et al. Clinical global impression of change in physical frailty: Development of a measure based on clinical judgment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004 Sep;52(9):1560–1566.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Amici A, Baratta A, Linguanti A et al. The Marigliano-Cacciafesta polypathological scale: A tool for assessing fragility. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2008;46(3):327–334.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, Tahir A, Rockwood K. Validity and reliability of the edmonton frail scale. Age Ageing. 2006 Sep;35(5):526–529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ravaglia G, Forti P, Lucicesare A, Pisacane N, Rietti E, Patterson C. Development of an easy prognostic score for frailty outcomes in the aged. Age Ageing. 2008;37(2):161–166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kulminski AM, Ukraintseva SV, Akushevich IV, Arbeev KG, Yashin AI. Cumulative index of health deficiencies as a characteristic of long life. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(6):935–940.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rockwood K, Mitnitski A. Frailty in relation to the accumulation of deficits. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62(7):722–727.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Searle SD, Mitnitski A, Gahbauer EA, Gill TM, Rockwood K. A standard procedure for creating a frailty index. BMC Geriatr. 2008;8:24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dupre ME, Gu D, Warner DF, Yi Z. Frailty and type of death among older adults in China: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2009;338:b1175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mitnitski A, Song X, Skoog I et al. Relative fitness and frailty of elderly men and women in developed countries and their relationship with mortality. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:2184–2189.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kulminski AM, Ukraintseva SV, Kulminskaya IV et al. Cumulative deficits better characterize susceptibility to death in elderly people than phenotypic frailty: lessons from the Cardiovascular Health Study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008;56:898–903.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ravaglia G, Forti P, Maioli F et al. Conselice study: A population based survey of brain aging in a muncipality of the Emilia Romagna region: (A.U.S.L. ravenna). design and methods. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2001;7:313–324.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mitnitski A, Bao L, Rockwood K. Going from bad to worse: A stochastic model of transitions in deficit accumulation, in relation to mortality. Mech Ageing Dev. 2006;127(5):490–493.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rockwood K, Andrew M, Mitnitski A. A comparison of two approaches to measuring frailty in elderly people. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62(7):738–743.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gavrilov LA, Gavrilova NS. Reliability theory of aging and longevity. In Handbook of the Biology of Aging. 2007 6th Edition: Academic Press.

  27. Rockwood K. What would make a definition of frailty successful? Age Ageing. 2005;34(5):432–434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Curb JD, Ceria-Ulep CD, Rodriguez BL et al. Performance-based measures of physical function for high-function populations. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(5):737–742.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Espinoza SE, Hazuda HP. Frailty in older Mexican-American and European-American adults: Is there an ethnic disparity? J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008;56(9):1744–1749.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Martin FC, Brighton P. Frailty: Different tools for different purposes? Age Ageing. 2008;37(2):129–131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jones DM, Song X, Rockwood K. Operationalizing a frailty index from a standardized comprehensive geriatric assessment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004;52(11):1929–1933.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Jones D, Song X, Mitnitski A, Rockwood K. Evaluation of a frailty index based on a comprehensive geriatric assessment in a population based study of elderly Canadians. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2005;17(6):465–471.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Cardioangiology, and Hepatology, University Hospital Sant’Orsola-Malpighi, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    A. Lucicesare, P. Forti & G. Ravaglia

  2. Geriatric Medicine Research Unit, Dalhousie University and Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, 5955 Veterans’ Memorial Lane, Halifax, B3H 2E1, Canada

    R. E. Hubbard, N. Fallah, S. D. Searle, A. Mitnitski & K. Rockwood

  3. Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada

    K. Rockwood

Authors
  1. A. Lucicesare
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. E. Hubbard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Fallah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Forti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. D. Searle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Mitnitski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. G. Ravaglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. K. Rockwood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lucicesare, A., Hubbard, R.E., Fallah, N. et al. Comparison of two frailty measures in the Conselice Study of Brain Ageing. J Nutr Health Aging 14, 278–281 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-010-0061-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-010-0061-6

Key words

Search

Navigation