Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing the current state of cognitive frailty: Measurement properties

  • Published:
The journal of nutrition, health & aging

Abstract

Background

Currently, an estimated 25-30% of people ages 85 or older have dementia, with a projected 115 million people worldwide living with dementia by 2050. With this worldwide phenomenon fast approaching, early detection of at-risk older adults and development of interventions focused on preventing loss in quality of life are increasingly important. A new construct defined by the International Consensus Group (I.A.N.A/I.A.G.G) as «cognitive frailty» combines domains of physical frailty with cognitive impairment and provides a framework for research that may provide a means to identify individuals with cognitive impairment caused by non-neurodegenerative conditions. Using the integrative review method of Whittemore and Knafl., 2005 this study examines and appraises the optimal measures for detecting cognitive frailty in clinical populations of older adults.

Methods

The integrative review was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycInfo, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. From the total 185 articles retrieved, review of titles and key words were conducted. Following the initial review, 168 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria for association of frailty and cognition. Of the 18 fulltext articles reviewed, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria; these articles were reviewed in-depth to determine validity and reliability of the cognitive frailty measures.

Results

Predictive validity was established by the studies reviewed in four main areas: frailty and type of dementia MCI (OR 7.4, 95% CI 4.2-13.2), vascular dementia (OR 6.7, 95% CI 1.6-27.4) and Alzheimer’s dementia (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.7-6.2), frailty and vascular dementia (VaAD) is further supported by the rate of change in frailty x macroinfarcts (r = 0.032, p < 0.001); frailty and the individual domains of cognitive function established with the relationship of neurocognitive speed and change in cognition using regression coefficients; individual components of frailty and individual domains of cognitive function associations inculded slow gait and executive function (β -0.20, p < 0.008 ), attention (β -0.25 p < 0.008), processing speed (β -0.16, p < 0.008), word recall (β - 0.18, p = 0.02), and logical memory (β = 0.04, p =0.04). Weak grip was predictive for changes in executive function (β - 0.16, p =0.008). Physical activity was associated with changes in executive function (β = -0.18, p= 0.02) and word recall (β = 0.17, p= 0.02), individual components of frailty and global cognitive function were found in several studies which included grip strength (r = - 0.51, p < 0.001), gait speed (r = - 0.067, p < 0.001), and exhaustion (β - 0.18, p < 0.008).

Conclusions

This paper presents the first-known review of the measurement properties for the cognitive frailty construct since the published results from the International Consensus Group (I.A.N.A/I.A.G.G). Evidence presented in this review continues to support the link between physical frailty and cognition with developing validity to support distinct relationships between components of physical frailty and cognitive decline. Results call attention to inconsistencies in reporting of reliability, validity, and heterogeneity in the measurements and operational definition for cognitive frailty. Further research is needed to establish an operational definition and develop psychometrically appropriate clinical measures to construct an understanding of the relationship between physical frailty and cognitive decline.

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

Figure 1
Table 1
Table 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. NIH, WHO. Global health and aging. 2011:1–32. http://www.nia.nih.gov/sites/default/files/global_health_and_aging.pdf. Accessed February 7, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Buchman AS, Bennett DA. Cognitive frailty. J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(9):738–739. doi:10.1007/s12603-013-0397-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Kelaiditi E, Cesari M, Canevelli M, et al. Cognitive frailty: rational and definition from an (I.A.N.A./I.A.G.G.) international consensus group. J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(9):726–734. doi:10.1007/s12603-013-0367-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Canevelli M, Kelaiditi E. The complex construct of mild cognitive impairment: Be aware of cognitive frailty. J Frailty Aging. 2014;3(2):87–88.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11253156. Accessed August 27, 2014.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Woodhouse, K. W., Wynne, H., Baillie, S., James, O. F. W., & Rawlins MD. Who are the frail elderly? Q J Med. 1988;68(1):505–506.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Kan GA, Rolland Y, Bergman H, Morley JE, Kritchevsky SB, Vellas B. The I.A.N.A. task force on frailty assessment of older people in clinical practice. J Nutr Heal Aging. 2008;12(1):29–37. doi:10.1007/BF02982161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rodríguez-Mañas L, Féart C, Mann G, et al. Searching for an operational definition of frailty: a Delphi method based consensus statement: the frailty operative definition-consensus conference project. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2013;68(1):62–67. doi:10.1093/gerona/gls119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fried LP, Ferrucci L, Darer J, Williamson JD, Anderson G. Untangling the Concepts of Disability, Frailty, and Comorbidity: Implications for Improved Targeting and Care. Journals Gerontol Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004;59(3):M255–M263. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.3.M255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Panza F, Solfrizzi V, Frisardi V, et al. Different models of frailty in predementia and dementia syndromes. J Nutr Health Aging. 2011;15(8):711–719. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21968870. Accessed February 5, 2015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nguyen T, Cumming R, Hilmer S. A Review Of Frailty In Developing Countries. Ageing Res Rev. 2013;20C(9):741–743. doi:10.1007/s12603-013-0398-8.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, Tahir A, Rockwood K. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing. 2006;35(5):526–529. doi:10.1093/ageing/afl041.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rockwood K, Stadnyk K, MacKnight C, McDowell I, Hébert R, Hogan DB. A brief clinical instrument to classify frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 1999;353(9148):205–206. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(98)04402-X.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gobbens RJJ, van Assen MALM, Schalk MJD. The prediction of disability by selfreported physical frailty components of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI). Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2014;59(2):280–287. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2014.06.008.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ensrud KE, Ewing SK, Taylor BC, et al. Comparison of 2 frailty indexes for prediction of falls, disability, fractures, and death in older women. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(4):382–389. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2007.113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Studenski S, Perera S, Wallace D, et al. Physical performance measures in the clinical setting. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51(3):314–322. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12588574. Accessed August 13, 2015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pel-Littel RE, Schuurmans MJ, Emmelot-Vonk MH, Verhaar HJJ. Frailty: defining and measuring of a concept. J Nutr Health Aging. 2009;13(4):390–394. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19300888. Accessed March 1, 2015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol. 1999;56(3):303–308. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10190820. Accessed January 14, 2015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Winblad B, Palmer K, Kivipelto M, et al. Mild cognitive impairment—beyond controversies, towards a consensus: report of the International Working Group on Mild Cognitive Impairment. J Intern Med. 2004;256(3):240–246. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2004.01380.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sachs-Ericsson N, Blazer DG. The new DSM-5 diagnosis of mild neurocognitive disorder and its relation to research in mild cognitive impairment. Aging Ment Health. 2015;19(1):2–12. doi:10.1080/13607863.2014.920303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mitchell AJ. A meta-analysis of the accuracy of the mini-mental state examination in the detection of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. J Psychiatr Res. 2009;43(4):411–431. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2008.04.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Larner AJ. Effect Size (Cohen’s d) of Cognitive Screening Instruments Examined in Pragmatic Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra. 2014;4(2):236–241. doi:10.1159/000363735.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. The Oxford Levels of Evidence 2. Oxford Cent Evidence-Based Med. 2011. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653. Accessed February 7, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ferrucci L, Guralnik JM, Studenski S, Fried LP, Cutler GB, Walston JD. Designing randomized, controlled trials aimed at preventing or delaying functional decline and disability in frail, older persons: a consensus report. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004;52(4):625–634. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52174.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Robertson DA, Savva GM, Kenny RA. Frailty and cognitive impairment—a review of the evidence and causal mechanisms. Ageing Res Rev. 2013;12(4):840–851. doi:10.1016/j.arr.2013.06.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Oosterveld SM, Kessels RPC, Hamel R, et al. The influence of co-morbidity and frailty on the clinical manifestation of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;42(2):501–509. doi:10.3233/JAD-140138.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McGough EL, Cochrane BB, Pike KC, Logsdon RG, McCurry SM, Teri L. Dimensions of physical frailty and cognitive function in older adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2013;56(5):329–341. doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2013.02.005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gray SL, Anderson ML, Hubbard RA, et al. Frailty and incident dementia. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2013;68(9):1083–1090. doi:10.1093/gerona/glt013.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Shimada H, Makizako H, Doi T, et al. Combined prevalence of frailty and mild cognitive impairment in a population of elderly Japanese people. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013;14(7):518–524. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2013.03.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kulmala J, Nykänen I, Mänty M, Hartikainen S. Association between frailty and dementia: a population-based study. Gerontology. 2014;60(1):16–21. doi:10.1159/000353859.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Han ES, Lee Y, Kim J. Association of cognitive impairment with frailty in community-dwelling older adults. Int Psychogeriatr. 2014;26(1):155–163. doi:10.1017/S1041610213001841.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Alencar MA, Dias JMD, Figueiredo LC, Dias RC. Frailty and cognitive impairment among community-dwelling elderly. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2013;71(6):362–367. doi:10.1590/0004-282X20130039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rolfson DB, Wilcock G, Mitnitski A, et al. An assessment of neurocognitive speed in relation to frailty. Age Ageing. 2013;42(2):191–196. doi:10.1093/ageing/afs185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Solfrizzi V, Scafato E, Frisardi V, et al. Frailty syndrome and the risk of vascular dementia: the Italian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Alzheimers Dement. 2013;9(2):113–122. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2011.09.223.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Buchman AS, Yu L, Wilson RS, Boyle PA, Schneider JA, Bennett DA. Brain pathology contributes to simultaneous change in physical frailty and cognition in old age. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014;69(12):1536–1544. doi:10.1093/gerona/glu117.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Robertson DA, Savva GM, Coen RF, Kenny R-A. Cognitive function in the prefrailty and frailty syndrome. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014;62(11):2118–2124. doi:10.1111/jgs.13111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189–198. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1202204. Accessed July 9, 2014.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical University of South Carolina, Faculty of Virginia Commonwealth University, School of Nursing, Richmond, VA, USA

    L. Sargent

  2. Virginia Commonwealth University School of Nursing Affiliate Faculty, Tompkins-McCaw Library for the Health Sciences, Richmond, VA, USA

    R. Brown

Authors
  1. L. Sargent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Sargent.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sargent, L., Brown, R. Assessing the current state of cognitive frailty: Measurement properties. J Nutr Health Aging 21, 152–160 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-016-0735-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-016-0735-9

Key words

Search

Navigation