The frailty phenotype and the frailty index: different instruments for different purposes
Citations Over TimeTop 1% of 2013 papers
Abstract
The integration of frailty measures in clinical practice is crucial for the development of interventions against disabling conditions in older persons. The frailty phenotype (proposed and validated by Fried and colleagues in the Cardiovascular Health Study) and the Frailty Index (proposed and validated by Rockwood and colleagues in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging) represent the most known operational definitions of frailty in older persons. Unfortunately, they are often wrongly considered as alternatives and/or substitutables. These two instruments are indeed very different and should rather be considered as complementary. In the present paper, we discuss about the designs and rationals of the two instruments, proposing the correct ways for having them implemented in the clinical setting.
Related Papers
- → Frailty in NHANES: Comparing the frailty index and phenotype(2015)427 cited
- → Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics(1986)350 cited
- Guidelines Of The Brazilian Geriatrics And Gerontology Society on the content of subjects/modules related to ag ing (Geriatrics and Gerontology) in medicine courses(2014)
- → Current Publications in Gerontology and Geriatrics(1976)
- → The 1st Annual Geriatrics& Gerontology Conference "Aging Facts and Challenges" The 1st Annual Geriatrics & Gerontology Conference “Aging Facts and Challenges" was held on behalf of the Geriatrics and Gerontology Department, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, 27-28 March 2014.(2014)