Scholarlink

Background <p>Qualitative studies suggest discrepancies between older adults’ self-perceived and measured frailty. Quantification of this is limited. This study investigated the relationship between older adults’ self-perceived frailty and a measure of frailty derived from electronic heath record data (electronic Frailty Index [eFI] score). The eFI is derived routinely from available primary care electronic health record data and is based on the cumulative deficit model of frailty.</p> Methods <p>One thousand people (≥ 70 years), randomly selected from a GP practice, were sent a survey, asking them to rate their frailty (ordinal and binary scale), and complete self-rated health (SRH) and PRISMA-7 questionnaires. We analysed (a) agreement between self-perceived frailty (ordinal scale) and eFI categorised frailty; (b) discrimination of self-report measures for eFI defined frailty (threshold ≥ 0.12); and (c) predictors of self-perceived frailty (logistic regressions).</p> Results <p>375 people were analysed (median age 76, 51% female). Agreement was ‘fair’ between self-perceived frailty and eFI (linear weighted Kappa 0.25, quadratic weighted Kappa 0.37). Agreement was higher with linear and quadratic weighted Gwet’s second order agreement co-efficient [AC2]), (0.65 and 0.81 respectively). As eFI increased, agreement with self-perceived frailty decreased. Disagreements commonly reflected self-perceived frailty reported as less severe than eFI.</p> <p>Self-perceived frailty poorly discriminated eFI defined frailty (AUC 0.59, 95%CI 0.55-0.63) as did SRH, while PRISMA-7 reached moderate discrimination (AUC 0.71, 95%CI 0.66-0.76). The optimal eFI cut-point for discriminating self-perceived frailty was 0.17.</p> <p>A multivariable regression model revealed increasing age (OR 1.10 per year, 95%CI 1.02-1.18) and depression (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.31-1.74) were associated with self-perceived frailty, however, sex, anxiety, eFI score and deprivation were not.</p> Conclusions <p>The mismatch between self-perceived and eFI categorised frailty has implications for the social acceptability of screening and for meaningful engagement with frailty interventions including advance care planning.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A cross-sectional study of the relationship between community dwelling older adults’ self-perceived frailty and their electronic frailty index score

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月1日

查看全文
  • Victoria Barber-Fleming,
  • Atul Anand,
  • Heather Wilkinson,
  • Gillian Mead

摘要

Background

Qualitative studies suggest discrepancies between older adults’ self-perceived and measured frailty. Quantification of this is limited. This study investigated the relationship between older adults’ self-perceived frailty and a measure of frailty derived from electronic heath record data (electronic Frailty Index [eFI] score). The eFI is derived routinely from available primary care electronic health record data and is based on the cumulative deficit model of frailty.

Methods

One thousand people (≥ 70 years), randomly selected from a GP practice, were sent a survey, asking them to rate their frailty (ordinal and binary scale), and complete self-rated health (SRH) and PRISMA-7 questionnaires. We analysed (a) agreement between self-perceived frailty (ordinal scale) and eFI categorised frailty; (b) discrimination of self-report measures for eFI defined frailty (threshold ≥ 0.12); and (c) predictors of self-perceived frailty (logistic regressions).

Results

375 people were analysed (median age 76, 51% female). Agreement was ‘fair’ between self-perceived frailty and eFI (linear weighted Kappa 0.25, quadratic weighted Kappa 0.37). Agreement was higher with linear and quadratic weighted Gwet’s second order agreement co-efficient [AC2]), (0.65 and 0.81 respectively). As eFI increased, agreement with self-perceived frailty decreased. Disagreements commonly reflected self-perceived frailty reported as less severe than eFI.

Self-perceived frailty poorly discriminated eFI defined frailty (AUC 0.59, 95%CI 0.55-0.63) as did SRH, while PRISMA-7 reached moderate discrimination (AUC 0.71, 95%CI 0.66-0.76). The optimal eFI cut-point for discriminating self-perceived frailty was 0.17.

A multivariable regression model revealed increasing age (OR 1.10 per year, 95%CI 1.02-1.18) and depression (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.31-1.74) were associated with self-perceived frailty, however, sex, anxiety, eFI score and deprivation were not.

Conclusions

The mismatch between self-perceived and eFI categorised frailty has implications for the social acceptability of screening and for meaningful engagement with frailty interventions including advance care planning.