Article Sidebar

PDF (Tiếng Việt)
Published: 2024-09-27
Abstract Views: 71
Views PDF (Tiếng Việt): 41
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52852/tcncyh.v181i8.2726
Issue
Vol. 181 No. 8 (2024)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Hương, N. T. M., Hạnh, N. H., Long, V. H., Hương, N. T. T., Thanh, N. X., & Huyền, V. T. T. (2024). 27. The prevalence of frailty syndrome according to the modified fried frailty scale and its associated factors in patients aged 60 years and older. Journal of Medical Research, 181(8), 244-255. https://doi.org/10.52852/tcncyh.v181i8.2726

27. The prevalence of frailty syndrome according to the modified fried frailty scale and its associated factors in patients aged 60 years and older

Nguyen Thi Mai Huong, Nguyen Hong Hanh, Vo Hoang Long, Nguyen Thi Thu Huong, Nguyen Xuan Thanh, Vu Thi Thanh Huyen

Main Article Content

Abstract

The study aimed to determine the prevalence of frailty syndrome according to the Modified Fried Frailty Scale and its associated factors in patient ≥ 60 years old. The study enrolled 1796 elderly patients at the E Hospital and the National Geriatric Hospital in 2022. According to the Modified Fried criteria, the prevalence of pre-frailty and frailty among the elderly was 38.59% and 41.70%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between the frail and non-frail elderly groups in terms of age, age group, BMI classification, marital status, living area, educational level, health insurance status, and Charlson comorbidity index. Age, BMI classification, educational level, and health insurance status were statistically significant factors associated with frailty syndrome in elderly patients. We found that the prevalence of frailty according to the Modified Fried criteria was consistent with studies conducted in other low- and middle-income countries. The study revealed a statistically significant independent association between age, BMI classification, educational level, and health insurance status with frailty syndrome in elderly patients.

Article Details

Keywords

Frailty syndrome, the elder, Modified Fried criteria

References

1. Vermeiren S, Vella-Azzopardi R, Beckwée D, et al. Frailty and the Prediction of Negative Health Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. Dec 1 2016; 17(12):1163.e1-1163.e17. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2016.09.010.
2. Choi J, Ahn A, Kim S, Won CW. Global Prevalence of Physical Frailty by Fried’s Criteria in Community-Dwelling Elderly With National Population-Based Surveys. J Am Med Dir Assoc. Jul 1 2015; 16(7): 548-50. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2015.02.004.
3. Collard RM, Boter H, Schoevers RA, Oude Voshaar RC. Prevalence of frailty in community-dwelling older persons: a systematic review. Journal of the american geriatrics society. 2012; 60(8): 1487-1492.
4. Sternberg SA, Schwartz AW, Karunananthan S, Bergman H, Mark Clarfield A. The identification of frailty: a systematic literature review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2011; 59(11): 2129-2138.
5. Gray WK, Richardson J, McGuire J, et al. Frailty screening in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2016; 64(4): 806-823.
6. Theou O, Cann L, Blodgett J, Wallace LM, Brothers TD, Rockwood K. Modifications to the frailty phenotype criteria: Systematic review of the current literature and investigation of 262 frailty phenotypes in the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe. Ageing Res Rev. May 2015; 21:78-94. doi:10.1016/j.arr.2015.04.001.
7. Mulla E, Montgomery U. Frailty: an overview. InnovAit. 2020; 13(2):71-79.
8. Organization WH. World report on ageing and health. World Health Organization; 2015.
9. Kaçmaz HY, Döner A, Ceyhan Ö. A point to evaluate in the COVID-19 pandemic process: Frailty. Acta Medica Alanya. 2021; 5(2): 210-215.
10. Hubbard RE, Peel NM, Samanta M, Gray LC, Mitnitski A, Rockwood K. Frailty status at admission to hospital predicts multiple adverse outcomes. Age and ageing. 2017; 46(5): 801-806.
11. Kasiukiewicz A, Wojszel ZB. The Prevalence of the Frailty Syndrome in a Hospital Setting—Is Its Diagnosis a Challenge? A Comparison of Four Frailty Scales in a Cross-Sectional Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023; 13(1):86.
12. Nguyen T, Cumming R, Hilmer S. A review of frailty in developing countries. The journal of nutrition, health & aging. 2015; 19:941-946.
13. Capistrant BD, Glymour MM, Berkman LF. Assessing mobility difficulties for cross-national comparisons: results from the World Health Organization Study on Global AGEing and Adult Health. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2014; 62(2): 329-335.
14. Leigh-Hunt N, Bagguley D, Bash K, et al. An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness. Public health. 2017; 152: 157-171.
15. Bessa B, Ribeiro O, Coelho T. Assessing the social dimension of frailty in old age: A systematic review. Archives of gerontology and geriatrics. 2018; 78:101-113.
16. Moreh E, Jacobs JM, Stessman J. Fatigue, function, and mortality in older adults. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2010; 65(8): 887-895.
17. Xu W, Tan L, Wang HF, et al. Meta-analysis of modifiable risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Dec 2015; 86(12): 1299-306. doi:10.1136/jnnp-2015-310548.
18. Shah K, Hilton TN, Myers L, Pinto JF, Luque AE, Hall WJ. A new frailty syndrome: central obesity and frailty in older adults with the human immunodeficiency virus. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2012; 60(3): 545-549.
19. Von dem Knesebeck O, Verde PE, Dragano N. Education and health in 22 European countries. Social science & medicine. 2006; 63(5): 1344-1351.
20. Hoogendijk EO, van Hout HP, Heymans MW, et al. Explaining the association between educational level and frailty in older adults: results from a 13-year longitudinal study in the Netherlands. Annals of epidemiology. 2014; 24(7): 538-544. e2.