The Edmonton frail scale: a feasibility study on assessing frailty among older adults with multimorbidity in Norwegian primary health care
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The growing prevalence of multimorbidity and frailty, driven by an ageing population and changing health trends, is placing significant pressure on healthcare systems. Frailty assessments provide valuable insights into patient vulnerability, allowing for early interventions to prevent functional decline and reduce hospitalisations. Despite their importance, standardised frailty assessment instruments are not widely used in primary care. This study investigated the feasibility of using one such instrument, the multidimensional Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS), in Norwegian primary healthcare. METHODS: This feasibility study involved 14 healthcare professionals (10 physiotherapists and four nurses) from primary healthcare in three Norwegian municipalities. Participants were trained to use the EFS to assess and generate frailty scores. Four focus group interviews explored these professionals' experiences of using the EFS with home-dwelling older adults with multimorbidity. The EFS scores were analysed with descriptive statistics, and the interview data underwent reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Through interview analysis, we identified three main themes: (i) enabling collaborative planning, (ii) facilitating comprehensive assessments, and (iii) integrating and understanding EFS competently. The assessment of frailty using the EFS among home-dwelling older adults with multimorbidity (n = 86) revealed scores ranging from 2 to 14, with 2% of these adults categorised as fit, 18% as pre-frail and 80% as frail. Most participants failed the clock test, and many had been hospitalised in the past year. Despite these challenges, 83% reported very good or fair self-perceived health, though the EFS scores indicated significant dependency in daily activities. Polypharmacy was common, with three-quarters of patients taking five or more medications. Additionally, recent weight loss, mobility issues and sadness or depression were frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: The EFS supported collaborative care planning by identifying frailty domains, facilitating tailored interventions to address challenges such as polypharmacy, mobility issues, emotional well-being, and dependency in daily activities. The themes of collaborative care, comprehensive assessments, and competent integration highlight the EFS's potential as a multidimensional instrument for routine use in primary care. With proper healthcare professional training, the EFS can promote person-centred care, improve overall care quality and support the early detection and prevention of complications, addressing the complex needs of older adults with multimorbidity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».