Comparison of Frailty Rates in Aged Patients Using Updated Clinical Guidelines
- Authors: Safonova J.A.1,2, Dyachkova-Gertseva D.S.1, Lapteva E.S.1
-
Affiliations:
- Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University
- Nasonova Clinical Rheumatology Hospital No. 25
- Issue: Vol 29, No 2 (2025)
- Pages: 77-84
- Section: Original study article
- URL: https://bakhtiniada.ru/RFD/article/view/313558
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/RFD646205
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/IRFVQF
- ID: 313558
Cite item
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with the dysfunction of various organs and systems. According to Russian publications, it is often identified through outpatient screening. However, the clinical guidelines for frailty were revised in 2024. The diagnosis algorithm was significantly simplified, eliminating the need for pre-frailty identification and assessment of functional, mental, and emotional disorders prior to a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether the updated diagnostic algorithm changed the rates of frailty and associated geriatric syndromes.
AIM: The study aimed to evaluate frailty rates in patients aged 60 years and older using the 2020 and 2024 diagnostic criteria, as well as determine the association between the rates of frailty and geriatric syndrome.
METHODS: This cross-sectional, single-center study included aged male and female patients. Frailty was diagnosed using the 2020 and 2024 criteria. A comprehensive geriatric assessment was then conducted using questionnaires and scales. The DK-50 digital hand dynamometer (Russia) was used to assess muscle strength.
RESULTS: The study included 462 patients (77 male and 385 female). The median age was 76 (62–83) years. No significant differences in frailty rates based on the 2020 and 2024 criteria, were found in the general aged population (25.7% and 29.9%, respectively; p = 0.164), nor in different age groups of men and women (p > 0.05). In addition, pre-frailty that was not identified using the 2024 criteria was present in 60.4% of patients. Of these, the Short Physical Performance Battery showed decreased mobility in 36.9% of patients, and the Mini-Cog test suspected cognitive impairment in 10.7% of patients. Among patients with frailty, muscle strength (p < 0.0027) and physical performance (p < 0.0015) were 3.9 and 8.9 times lower, respectively, using the 2020 criteria. Skeletal muscle function less than 2 times lower, using the 2024 criteria.
CONCLUSION: The frailty rates showed no difference by sex or age, using the 2020 and 2024 criteria. Screening for frailty using the 2024 criteria, revealed that 36.9% of patients previously identified as pre-frail were underdiagnosed for functional disorders related to decreased mobility, which significantly increased the risk of frailty.
Keywords
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
Julia A. Safonova
Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University; Nasonova Clinical Rheumatology Hospital No. 25
Author for correspondence.
Email: jula_safonova@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2923-9712
SPIN-code: 9690-6636
MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)
Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Saint PetersburgDaria S. Dyachkova-Gertseva
Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University
Email: lapts@icloud.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5527-6747
SPIN-code: 9782-8518
Assistant at the Department
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgEkaterina S. Lapteva
Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University
Email: les67@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0857-1786
SPIN-code: 3168-2568
MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)
Russian Federation, Saint PetersburgReferences
- Leaving No One Behind in an Ageing World [Internet]. World Social Report 2023 United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Available from: https://desapublications.un.org/publications/world-social-report-2023-leaving-no-one-behind-ageing-world. Accessed: 10 Dec 2024.
- Tkacheva ON, Kotovskaya YuV, Runikhina NK, et al. Clinical guidelines on frailty. Russian Journal of Geriatric Medicine. 2020;(1):11–46. doi: 10.37586/2686-8636-1-2020-11-46
- Kojima G, Taniguchi Y, Iliffe S, et al. Transitions between frailty states among community-dwelling older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ageing Res Rev. 2019;50:81–88. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2019.01.010
- Won CW. Diagnosis and management of frailty in primary health care. Korean J Fam Med. 2020;41(4):207–213. doi: 10.4082/kjfm.20.0122
- Ensrud KE, Ewing SK, Taylor BC, et al. Frailty and risk of falls, fracture, and mortality in older women: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62(7):744–751. doi: 10.1093/gerona/62.7.744
- Li G, Thabane L, Ioannidis G, et al. Comparison between frailty index of deficit accumulation and phenotypic model to predict risk of falls: data from the global longitudinal study of osteoporosis in women (GLOW) Hamilton cohort. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0120144. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120144
- 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. 2016;17(12):1163.e1–1163.e17. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2016.09.010
- Juma S, Taabazuing MM, Montero-Odasso M. Clinical frailty scale in an acute medicine unit: a simple tool that predicts length of stay. Can Geriatr J. 2016;19(2):34–9. doi: 10.5770/cgj.19.196
- Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, et al. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013;381(9868):752–762. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62167-9
- Middleton R, Poveda JL, Pernas FO, et al. Mortality, falls, and fracture risk are positively associated with frailty: A SIDIAP Cohort Study of 890 000 patients. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2022;77(1):148–154. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glab102
- Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Cardiovascular Health Study Collaborative Research Group. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56(3):M146–156. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146
- Kaskirbayeva D, West R, Jaafari H, et al. Progression of frailty as measured by a cumulative deficit index: a systematic review. Ageing Res Rev. 2023;84:101789. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2022.101789
- Clinical guidelines “Frailty”. 2024. [Internet]. Available from: https://cr.minzdrav.gov.ru/recomend/613_2. Accessed: 27 April 2025. (In Russ.)
- Tkacheva ON, Vorob’eva NM, Kotovskaya YuV, et al. Prevalence of geriatric syndromes in persons over 65 years: the first results of the EVCALIPT study. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2020;25(10):3985. doi: 10.15829/1560-4071-2020-3985
- Turusheva AV, Frolova EV, Bogdanova TA. The prevalence of frailty, measured with different diagnostic tools, and autonomy decline: Results of the Crystal study. Russian Family Doctor. 2021;25(1):35–43. doi: 10.17816/RFD61632
- To T-L, Doan T-N, Ho W-C, Liao W-C. Prevalence of frailty among community-dwelling older adults in Asian countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Healthcare. 2022;10(5):895. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10050895
- O’Caoimh R, Sezgin D, O’Donovan MR, et al. Prevalence of frailty in 62 countries across the world: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-level studies. Age Ageing. 2021;50(1):96–104. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afaa219
- Ostapenko VS, Runikhina NK, Sharashkina NV. Prevalence of frailty and its correlation with chronic non-infectious diseases among outpatients in Moscow. Russian Journal of Geriatric Medicine. 2020;(2):131–137. doi: 10.37586/2686-8636-2-2020-131-137
- Palomo I, García F, Albala C, et al. characterization by gender of frailty syndrome in elderly people according to frail trait scale and fried frailty phenotype. J Pers Med. 2022;12(5):712. doi: 10.3390/jpm12050712
- Chernov A, Silyutina M, Taranina O, et al. The prevalence of geriatric syndromes in patients of older age groups in the Voronezh Region. Vrach. 2022;33(12):79–81. (In Russ.) doi: 10.29296/25877305-2022-12-15
Supplementary files
