Cargando…
Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls
BACKGROUND: Frailty can be defined as an inflammatory state with a loss of physiologic reserve in multiple systems that manifests as a decreased ability to respond to stressors that ultimately leads to an increased risk of adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the ease of frailty...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elmer Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5755647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29317953 http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jocmr3203w |
_version_ | 1783290611864961024 |
---|---|
author | Adlam, Taylor Ulrich, Elizabeth Kent, Missy Malinzak, Lauren |
author_facet | Adlam, Taylor Ulrich, Elizabeth Kent, Missy Malinzak, Lauren |
author_sort | Adlam, Taylor |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Frailty can be defined as an inflammatory state with a loss of physiologic reserve in multiple systems that manifests as a decreased ability to respond to stressors that ultimately leads to an increased risk of adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the ease of frailty testing in a pre-kidney transplant clinic and the resources required to do so. A secondary goal was to better understand the utility of frailty testing when evaluating potential kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: Frailty testing was conducted at a pre-kidney transplant clinic in three phases using Fried’s frailty phenotype (shrinking, exhaustion, low physical activity, slowness, and grip strength). RESULTS: A total of 132 frailty tests were completed on 128 patients. Frail patients had significantly higher rates of shrinking (26% vs. 8.5%, P < 0.05), exhaustion (82.6% vs. 27.6%, P < 0.05), low physical activity (78.2% vs. 19.0%, P < 0.05), slow walking (60.8% vs. 15.2%, P < 0.05), and grip strength (73.9% vs. 25.7%, P < 0.05). When comparing the listing of frail and non-frail patients for transplant, a significantly lower proportion of frail patients were listed compared to non-frail patients (30.4% vs. 57.6%, P < 0.05). Frailty testing was most complete when an examiner dedicated to frailty testing performed the testing. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty testing is feasible to complete in a pre-transplant clinic with an appropriate investment in personnel and resources. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5755647 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Elmer Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57556472018-01-09 Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls Adlam, Taylor Ulrich, Elizabeth Kent, Missy Malinzak, Lauren J Clin Med Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Frailty can be defined as an inflammatory state with a loss of physiologic reserve in multiple systems that manifests as a decreased ability to respond to stressors that ultimately leads to an increased risk of adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine the ease of frailty testing in a pre-kidney transplant clinic and the resources required to do so. A secondary goal was to better understand the utility of frailty testing when evaluating potential kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: Frailty testing was conducted at a pre-kidney transplant clinic in three phases using Fried’s frailty phenotype (shrinking, exhaustion, low physical activity, slowness, and grip strength). RESULTS: A total of 132 frailty tests were completed on 128 patients. Frail patients had significantly higher rates of shrinking (26% vs. 8.5%, P < 0.05), exhaustion (82.6% vs. 27.6%, P < 0.05), low physical activity (78.2% vs. 19.0%, P < 0.05), slow walking (60.8% vs. 15.2%, P < 0.05), and grip strength (73.9% vs. 25.7%, P < 0.05). When comparing the listing of frail and non-frail patients for transplant, a significantly lower proportion of frail patients were listed compared to non-frail patients (30.4% vs. 57.6%, P < 0.05). Frailty testing was most complete when an examiner dedicated to frailty testing performed the testing. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty testing is feasible to complete in a pre-transplant clinic with an appropriate investment in personnel and resources. Elmer Press 2018-02 2017-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5755647/ /pubmed/29317953 http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jocmr3203w Text en Copyright 2018, Adlam et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Adlam, Taylor Ulrich, Elizabeth Kent, Missy Malinzak, Lauren Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls |
title | Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls |
title_full | Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls |
title_fullStr | Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls |
title_full_unstemmed | Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls |
title_short | Frailty Testing Pilot Study: Pros and Pitfalls |
title_sort | frailty testing pilot study: pros and pitfalls |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5755647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29317953 http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jocmr3203w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT adlamtaylor frailtytestingpilotstudyprosandpitfalls AT ulrichelizabeth frailtytestingpilotstudyprosandpitfalls AT kentmissy frailtytestingpilotstudyprosandpitfalls AT malinzaklauren frailtytestingpilotstudyprosandpitfalls |