Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Outreach
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
  • CONFERENCE
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
BJGP Open
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Outreach
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
  • CONFERENCE
Research

Diagnostic accuracy of the FRAIL scale plus functional measures for frailty screening: a cross-sectional study

Ángel Rodríguez-Laso, Iñaki Martín-Lesende, Alan Sinclair, Sandrine Sourdet, Matteo Tosato and Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas
BJGP Open 2022; 6 (3): BJGPO.2021.0220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2021.0220
Ángel Rodríguez-Laso
1 CIBERFES (Network-based Biomedical Research Consortium, area of Frailty and Healthy Ageing), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ángel Rodríguez-Laso
Iñaki Martín-Lesende
2 Indautxu Primary Health Centre, Bilbao-Basurto Integrated Health Organisation, Basque Health Service (Osakidetza), Bilbao, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Iñaki Martín-Lesende
Alan Sinclair
3 Foundation for Diabetes Research in Older People (fDROP), London, UK
4 Medical Sciences, Nursing and Midwifery, Kings College, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Alan Sinclair
Sandrine Sourdet
5 Department of Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sandrine Sourdet
Matteo Tosato
6 Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCSS, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Matteo Tosato
Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas
1 CIBERFES (Network-based Biomedical Research Consortium, area of Frailty and Healthy Ageing), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas
  • For correspondence: leocadio.rodriguez@salud.madrid.org
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1. Recommended frailty screening algorithm in primary care. CGA = comprehensive geriatric assessment. SPPB = Short Physical Performance Battery.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1. Characteristics of the sample for the cross-sectional analysis (n = 362)
    CategoryVariablen (%)a
    Age, years, median (IQR)79 (77–82)
    Sex, female213 (58.8)
    CityGetafe (Spain)116 (32.0)
    Toulouse (France)93 (25.7)
    Rome (Italy)78 (21.5)
    Cracow (Poland)48 (13.3)
    Birmingham (UK)27 (7.5)
    Charlson Comorbidity Index score, median (IQR)4 (4–5)
    Barthel index score, median (IQR)100 (95–100)
    Lawton and Brody scale score, median (IQR)8 (7–8)
    Frail according to frailty phenotypeb 54 (14.9)
    Frail or prefrail according to frailty phenotypeb Total276 (76.2)
    Missing4 (1.1)
    Number of items of the frailty phenotypeb 082 (22.7)
    1112 (30.9)
    2104 (28.7)
    333 (9.1)
    417 (4.7)
    51 (0.3)
    Missing13 (3.6)
    Frailty index score, median (IQR)0.16 (0.12–0.22)
    Frail according to frailty index55 (15.2)
    Number of items of the FRAIL scale0209 (57.7)
    185 (23.5)
    238 (10.5)
    325 (6.9)
    44 (1.1)
    51 (0.3)
    SPPB score, median (IQR)10 (9–11)
    Gait speed, m/sTotal, median (IQR)1 (0.9–1.3)
    Missing18 (5.0)
    Worsening of dependence in basic activities of daily livingTotal46 (16.7)c
    Missing87 (24.0)
    Worsening of dependence in instrumental activities of daily livingTotal47 (17.1)c
    Missing87 (24.0)
    DeathsTotal2 (0.8)d
    Missing107 (29.6)
    • aUnless otherwise stated. bThese numbers do not match because of the possibility of assigning an individual with missing items to the frail or frail+ prefrail categories. c N = 275. d N = 255. IQR = interquartile range. SPPB = Short Physical Performance Battery.

    • View popup
    Table 2. Prevalence and diagnostic accuracy for frailty of different cut-offs of the FRAIL scale
    FRAIL scalePrevalence (95% CI)Sensitivity (95% CI)Specificity (95% CI)% of positives who were not frail (95% CI)
    Fried's frailty phenotypeFrailty indexFried's frailty phenotypeFrailty indexFried's frailty phenotypeFrailty index
    ≥38.3(5.4 to 11.1)37.0(23.7 to 50.3)23.6(12.0 to 35.2)96.8(94.8 to 98.7)94.5(91.9 to 97.0)33.3(15.4 to 51.2)56.7(37.8 to 75.5)
    ≥218.8(14.7 to 22.8)66.7(53.7 to 79.7)40.0(26.6 to 53.4)89.6(86.2 to 93.0)85.0(81.0 to 89.0)47.1(34.9 to 59.2)67.6(56.2 to 79.1)
    ≥142.3(37.2 to 47.4)83.3(73.1 to 93.6)74.5(62.7 to 86.4)64.9(59.6 to 70.3)63.5(58.1 to 68.9)70.6(63.3 to 77.9)73.2(66.1 to 80.3)
    • View popup
    Table 3. Prevalence and diagnostic accuracy for frailty of different SPPB scores in individuals with a FRAIL score ≥1
    SPPB scorePrevalence (95% CI)Sensitivity (95% CI)Specificity (95% CI)% of positives who were not frail (95% CI)
    Fried's frailty phenotypeFrailty indexFried's frailty phenotypeFrailty indexFried's frailty phenotypeFrailty index
    0.6(0.0 to 1.3)3.7(0.0 to 8.9)3.6(0.0 to 8.7)100.0100.00.00.0
    <20.8(0.0 to 1.8)5.6(0.0 to 11.9)3.6(0.0 to 8.7)100.099.7(99.0 to 100.0)0.033.3(0.0 to 100.0)
    <31.1(0.0 to 2.2)7.4(0.2 to 14.6)5.5(0.0 to 11.7)100.099.7(99.0 to 100.0)0.025.0(0.0 to 100.0)
    <41.9(0.5 to 3.4)11.1(2.5 to 19.8)7.3(0.2 to 14.4)99.7(99.0 to 100.0)99.0(97.9 to 100.0)14.3(0.0 to 49.2)42.9(0.0 to 92.3)
    <53.0(1.3 to 4.8)18.5(7.8 to 29.2)10.9(2.4 to 19.4)99.7(99.0 to 100.0)98.4(96.9 to 99.8)9.1(0.0 to 29.3)45.5(10.4 to 80.5)
    <65.5(3.2 to 7.9)31.5(18.7 to 44.3)21.8(10.6 to 33.1)99.0(97.9 to 100.0)97.4(95.6 to 99.2)15.0(0.0 to 32.1)40.0(16.5 to 63.5)
    <77.2(4.5 to 9.9)38.9(25.5 to 52.3)23.6(12.0 to 35.2)98.4(97 to 99.8)95.8(93.5 to 98.0)19.2(3.0 to 35.5)50.0(29.4 to 70.6)
    <810.2(7.1 to 13.4)46.3(32.6 to 60.0)30.9(18.3 to 43.5)96.1(93.9 to 98.3)93.5(90.7 to 96.3)32.4(16.6 to 48.3)54.1(37.2 to 70.9)
    <915.7(12.0 to 19.5)55.6(41.9 to 69.2)40.0(26.6 to 53.4)91.2(88.1 to 94.4)88.6(85.0 to 92.2)47.4(34.0 to 60.7)61.4(48.4 to 74.4)
    <1024.6(20.1 to 29.0)68.5(55.7 to 81.3)56.4(42.8 to 69.9)83.1(78.9 to 87.3)81.1(76.7 to 85.5)58.4(48.0 to 68.9)65.2(55.1 to 75.3)
    32.3(27.5 to 37.2)72.2(59.9 to 84.6)67.3(54.5 to 80.1)74.7(69.8 to 79.6)73.9(69.0 to 78.9)66.7(58.0 to 75.3)68.4(59.8 to 76.9)
    <1238.4(33.4 to 43.4)75.9(64.1 to 87.7)72.7(60.6 to 84.9)68.2(63.0 to 73.4)67.8(62.5 to 73.0)70.5(62.8 to 78.2)71.2(63.6 to 78.8)
    • Percentages refer to the total sample (n = 362), not only to individuals with a FRAIL score ≥1. SPPB = Short Physical Performance Battery.

    • View popup
    Table 4. Prevalence and diagnostic accuracy for frailty of different gait speeds in individuals with a FRAIL score ≥1
    Gait speed, m/sPrevalence (95% CI)Sensitivity (95% CI)Specificity (95% CI)% of positives who were not frail (95% CI)
    Fried's frailty phenotypeFrailty indexFried's frailty phenotypeFrailty indexFried's frailty phenotypeFrailty index
    <0.66.7(4.1 to 9.4)36.0(22.2 to 49.8)24.5(12.0 to 37.0)98.3(96.8 to 99.8)96.2(94.1 to 98.4)21.7(3.5 to 40.0)47.8(25.7 to 69.9)
    <0.79.6(6.5 to 12.8)40.0(25.9 to 54.1)24.5(12.0 to 37.0)95.5(93.2 to 97.9)92.8(89.9 to 95.8)39.4(21.8 to 57.0)63.6(46.3 to 81.0)
    <0.816.4(12.4 to 20.3)52.0(37.7 to 66.3)34.7(20.9 to 48.5)89.7(86.2 to 93.2)86.7(82.8 to 90.6)53.6(40.1 to 67.0)69.6(57.2 to 82.1)
    <0.923.7(19.2 to 28.2)62.0(48.1 to 75.9)57.1(42.8 to 71.5)82.9(78.5 to 87.2)81.9(77.5 to 86.3)61.7(50.9 to 72.5)65.4(54.9 to 76.0)
    <133.0(28.0 to 38.1)74.0(61.4 to 86.6)69.4(56.0 to 82.8)74.0(68.9 to 79.0)73.0(67.9 to 78.1)67.3(58.5 to 76.0)69.9(61.3 to 78.5)
    <1.136.3(31.1 to 41.4)80.0(68.5 to 91.5)71.4(58.3 to 84.5)71.2(66.0 to 76.5)69.6(64.3 to 74.9)67.7(59.4 to 76.1)71.8(63.7 to 79.8)
    <1.239.5(34.3 to 44.7)82.0(71.0 to 93.0)73.5(60.7 to 86.3)67.8(62.4 to 73.2)66.2(60.8 to 71.7)69.6(61.8 to 77.5)73.3(65.8 to 80.9)
    <1.341.5(36.3 to 46.8)82.0(71.0 to 93.0)75.5(63.0 to 88.0)65.4(59.9 to 70.9)64.2(58.6 to 69.7)71.1(63.6 to 78.7)73.9(66.6 to 81.3)
    <1.442.1(36.8 to 47.4)82.0(71.0 to 93.0)75.5(63.0 to 88.0)64.7(59.2 to 70.2)63.5(57.9 to 69.0)71.5(64.1 to 79.0)74.3(67.1 to 81.5)
    <1.542.4(37.1 to 47.7)82.0(71.0 to 93.0)75.5(63.0 to 88.0)64.4(58.9 to 69.9)63.1(57.6 to 68.7)71.7(64.3 to 79.1)74.5(67.3 to 81.7)
    • Percentages refer to the total sample (n = 342), not only to individuals with a FRAIL score ≥1.

Supplementary Data

  • RM_BJGPO.2021.0220_Supp.pdf -

    Supplementary material is not copyedited or typeset, and is published as supplied by the author(s). The author(s) retain(s) responsibility for its accuracy.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 6, Issue 3
September 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Diagnostic accuracy of the FRAIL scale plus functional measures for frailty screening: a cross-sectional study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Diagnostic accuracy of the FRAIL scale plus functional measures for frailty screening: a cross-sectional study
Ángel Rodríguez-Laso, Iñaki Martín-Lesende, Alan Sinclair, Sandrine Sourdet, Matteo Tosato, Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas
BJGP Open 2022; 6 (3): BJGPO.2021.0220. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2021.0220

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Diagnostic accuracy of the FRAIL scale plus functional measures for frailty screening: a cross-sectional study
Ángel Rodríguez-Laso, Iñaki Martín-Lesende, Alan Sinclair, Sandrine Sourdet, Matteo Tosato, Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas
BJGP Open 2022; 6 (3): BJGPO.2021.0220. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2021.0220
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits in
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • primary health care
  • frailty
  • frailty phenotype
  • mass screening

More in this TOC Section

  • Driving forces of general practitioners’ migration in Europe - an exploratory study
  • Exploring the impact of prior spontaneous miscarriage on stress among pregnant women during the first trimester: an observational study
  • Translating primary care to telehealth: analysis of in-person consultations on diabetes and cardiovascular disease
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

@BJGPOpen's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2023 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795