Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How clinical practitioners assess frailty in their daily practice: an international survey
Univ Liege, Dept Publ Hlth Epidemiol & Hlth Econ, CHU Sart Tilman, Bat B23, B-4000 Liege, Belgium..
Univ Liege, Dept Publ Hlth Epidemiol & Hlth Econ, CHU Sart Tilman, Bat B23, B-4000 Liege, Belgium..
Univ Liege, Dept Publ Hlth Epidemiol & Hlth Econ, CHU Sart Tilman, Bat B23, B-4000 Liege, Belgium..
Univ Liege, Dept Publ Hlth Epidemiol & Hlth Econ, CHU Sart Tilman, Bat B23, B-4000 Liege, Belgium..
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, ISSN 1594-0667, E-ISSN 1720-8319, Vol. 29, no 5, p. 905-912Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction: Various operational definitions have been proposed to assess the frailty condition among older individuals. Our objective was to assess how practitioners measure the geriatric syndrome of frailty in their daily routine.

Methods: An online survey was sent to national geriatric societies affiliated to the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS) and to members of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).

Results: A total of 388 clinicians from 44 countries answered to the survey. Most of them were medical doctors (93%), and their primary field of practice was geriatrics (83%). Two hundred and five clinicians (52.8%) always assessed frailty in their daily practice, 38.1% reported to "sometimes" measure it, and 9.1% never assess it. A substantial proportion of clinicians (64.9%) diagnose frailty using more than one instrument. The most widely used tool was the gait speed test, adopted by 43.8% of the clinicians, followed by clinical frailty scale (34.3%), the SPPB test (30.2%), the frailty phenotype (26.8%) and the frailty index (16.8%).

Conclusion: A variety of tools is used to assess frailty of older patients in clinical practice highlighting the need for standardisation and guidelines.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SPRINGER , 2017. Vol. 29, no 5, p. 905-912
Keywords [en]
Frailty, Survey, Clinical practice, Standardisation
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-335130DOI: 10.1007/s40520-017-0806-8ISI: 000410125900009OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-335130DiVA, id: diva2:1162195
Available from: 2017-12-04 Created: 2017-12-04 Last updated: 2018-02-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(534 kB)13 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 534 kBChecksum SHA-512
3b5de548a0a441ffd1c5dfb75d8e9bc136da314c286439337f3108d26881d983ab8e2da6ad6c4ce3bf78c14547e14c16e0a26bea64a6988ce11987092f62bac2
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Cederholm, Tommy
By organisation
Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism
In the same journal
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 13 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 45 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf