AI Article Synopsis
- The study analyzed how well subjective frailty assessments (SFA) by healthcare professionals matched up with a standardized frailty index, the Paulson-Lichtenberg Frailty Index (PLFI), among 202 clinic patients aged about 77 years on average.* -
- Out of the participants, 26% were prefrail and 28% were frail based on the PLFI, but the agreement between the SFA evaluations by geriatricians and nurses with PLFI classifications was inconsistent.* -
- The results showed only slight-to-fair agreement overall, with geriatricians aligning 43% of the time for prefrail and 66% for frail, while nurses had lower alignment accuracy, indicating
Article Abstract
We examined the level of agreement between subjective frailty assessments (SFA) and frailty classifications derived from the validated Paulson-Lichtenberg Frailty Index (PLFI). Clinic patients ( = 202) were classified as healthy, prefrail, or frail first by screening using the PLFI and later by two geriatric nurses and two geriatricians according to SFA. Of the 202 participants (mean age = 76.7 ± 8.6), 52 (26%) were prefrail and 57 (28%) were frail based on the PLFI. Geriatrician SFA aligned with the PLFI in 43.0% of prefrail and 65.7% of frail cases. Nurse SFA aligned with the PLFI in 43.9% of prefrail and 17.0% of frail cases. There was slight-to-fair agreement between SFA and PLFI (geriatrician: Cohen's κ = .23; 95% confidence interval (CI) = [.11, .35], < .001; nurse: Cohen's κ = .20; 95% CI = [.08, .33], = .001). Clinician SFA did not align well with PLFI classifications.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7003161 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2333721420904234 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!