7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Frailty and Its Associated Risk Factors: First Phase Analysis of Multicentre Indonesia Longitudinal Aging Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: National long-term care development requires updated epidemiological data related to frailty. We aimed to find the prevalence of frailty and its associated factors among Indonesian elderly.

          Methods: We conducted first-phase cross-sectional analysis of Indonesia Longitudinal Aging Study (INALAS) data collected from community-dwelling outpatients aged 60 years and older without acute illness in nine geriatric service care centres. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted.

          Results: Among 908 elderly in this study, 15.10% were robust, 66.20% were pre-frail, and 18.70% were frail. Functional dependence was associated with frailty among Indonesian elderly (OR 5.97, 95% CI 4.04–8.80). Being depressed and at risk for malnutrition were also associated with frailty with OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.56–4.12, and OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.68–3.90, respectively. Prior history of fall (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.16–2.72) and hospitalization (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.97–2.20) in the previous 12 months were associated with frailty. There is also significant association between poly pharmacy and frailty (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.50–3.91).

          Conclusion: Approximately one in five Indonesian community-dwelling elderly was frail. Frailty is associated with functional dependence, being at risk for malnutrition or being malnourished, depression, history of fall, history of hospitalization, and poly pharmacy. There may be bidirectional relationships between the risk factors and frailty. The development of long-term care in Indonesia should be considered, without forcing the elderly who need it.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          What is polypharmacy? A systematic review of definitions

          Background Multimorbidity and the associated use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy), is common in the older population. Despite this, there is no consensus definition for polypharmacy. A systematic review was conducted to identify and summarise polypharmacy definitions in existing literature. Methods The reporting of this systematic review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE and Cochrane were systematically searched, as well as grey literature, to identify articles which defined the term polypharmacy (without any limits on the types of definitions) and were in English, published between 1st January 2000 and 30th May 2016. Definitions were categorised as i. numerical only (using the number of medications to define polypharmacy), ii. numerical with an associated duration of therapy or healthcare setting (such as during hospital stay) or iii. Descriptive (using a brief description to define polypharmacy). Results A total of 1156 articles were identified and 110 articles met the inclusion criteria. Articles not only defined polypharmacy but associated terms such as minor and major polypharmacy. As a result, a total of 138 definitions of polypharmacy and associated terms were obtained. There were 111 numerical only definitions (80.4% of all definitions), 15 numerical definitions which incorporated a duration of therapy or healthcare setting (10.9%) and 12 descriptive definitions (8.7%). The most commonly reported definition of polypharmacy was the numerical definition of five or more medications daily (n = 51, 46.4% of articles), with definitions ranging from two or more to 11 or more medicines. Only 6.4% of articles classified the distinction between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy, using descriptive definitions to make this distinction. Conclusions Polypharmacy definitions were variable. Numerical definitions of polypharmacy did not account for specific comorbidities present and make it difficult to assess safety and appropriateness of therapy in the clinical setting.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Frailty consensus: a call to action.

            Frailty is a clinical state in which there is an increase in an individual's vulnerability for developing increased dependency and/or mortality when exposed to a stressor. Frailty can occur as the result of a range of diseases and medical conditions. A consensus group consisting of delegates from 6 major international, European, and US societies created 4 major consensus points on a specific form of frailty: physical frailty. 1. Physical frailty is an important medical syndrome. The group defined physical frailty as "a medical syndrome with multiple causes and contributors that is characterized by diminished strength, endurance, and reduced physiologic function that increases an individual's vulnerability for developing increased dependency and/or death." 2. Physical frailty can potentially be prevented or treated with specific modalities, such as exercise, protein-calorie supplementation, vitamin D, and reduction of polypharmacy. 3. Simple, rapid screening tests have been developed and validated, such as the simple FRAIL scale, to allow physicians to objectively recognize frail persons. 4. For the purposes of optimally managing individuals with physical frailty, all persons older than 70 years and all individuals with significant weight loss (>5%) due to chronic disease should be screened for frailty. Copyright © 2013 American Medical Directors Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A simple frailty questionnaire (FRAIL) predicts outcomes in middle aged African Americans.

              To validate the FRAIL scale. Longitudinal study. Community. Representative sample of African Americans age 49 to 65 years at onset of study. The 5-item FRAIL scale (fatigue, resistance, ambulation, illnesses, and loss of weight), at baseline and activities of daily living (ADLs), instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), mortality, short physical performance battery (SPPB), gait speed, one-leg stand, grip strength and injurious falls at baseline and 9 years. Blood tests for CRP, SIL6R, STNFR1, STNFR2 and 25 (OH) vitamin D at baseline. Cross-sectionally the FRAIL scale correlated significantly with IADL difficulties, SPPB, grip strength and one-leg stand among participants with no baseline ADL difficulties (N=703) and those outcomes plus gait speed in those with no baseline ADL dependencies (N=883). TNFR1 was increased in pre-frail and frail subjects and CRP in some subgroups. Longitudinally (N=423 with no baseline ADL difficulties or N=528 with no baseline ADL dependencies), and adjusted for the baseline value for each outcome, being pre-frail at baseline significantly predicted future ADL difficulties, worse one-leg stand scores, and mortality in both groups, plus IADL difficulties in the dependence-excluded group. Being frail at baseline significantly predicted future ADL difficulties, IADL difficulties, and mortality in both groups, plus worse SPPB in the dependence-excluded group. This study has validated the FRAIL scale in a late middle-aged African American population. This simple 5-question scale is an excellent screening test for clinicians to identify frail persons at risk of developing disability as well as decline in health functioning and mortality.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Med (Lausanne)
                Front Med (Lausanne)
                Front. Med.
                Frontiers in Medicine
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-858X
                29 April 2021
                2021
                : 8
                : 658580
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Division of Geriatrics, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Universitas Indonesia , Jakarta, Indonesia
                [2] 2Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Universitas Indonesia , Jakarta, Indonesia
                [3] 3Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Udayana , Bali, Indonesia
                [4] 4Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Brawijaya , Malang, Indonesia
                [5] 5Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Sebelas Maret , Solo, Indonesia
                [6] 6Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Andalas , Padang, Indonesia
                [7] 7Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Padjajaran , Bandung, Indonesia
                [8] 8Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Hasanuddin , Makasar, Indonesia
                [9] 9Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Atma Jaya , Jakarta, Indonesia
                Author notes

                Edited by: Jinhui Wu, Sichuan University, China

                Reviewed by: Maycon Sousa Pegorari, Universidade Federal Do Amapá, Brazil; Carlo Pietro Campobasso, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Italy

                *Correspondence: Siti Setiati s_setiati@ 123456yahoo.com

                This article was submitted to Geriatric Medicine, a section of the journal Frontiers in Medicine

                Article
                10.3389/fmed.2021.658580
                8116892
                eed617a0-6ac4-4994-a9d1-3ca3972a45a4
                Copyright © 2021 Setiati, Soejono, Harimurti, Dwimartutie, Aryana, Sunarti, Budiningsih, Mulyana, Dwipa, Sudarso, Rensa, Istanti, Azwar and Marsigit.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 26 January 2021
                : 29 March 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 33, Pages: 8, Words: 5748
                Funding
                Funded by: Universitas Indonesia 10.13039/501100006378
                Award ID: NKB-1534/UN2.RST/HKP/05.00/2020
                Categories
                Medicine
                Original Research

                frailty,prevalence,indonesia,community-dwelling elderly,long-term care,risk factors

                Comments

                Comment on this article