Objectives: A better understanding of the essential components of frailty is important for future developments of management strategies. We aimed to assess the incremental validity of a Comprehensive Model of Frailty (CMF) over Frailty...
moreObjectives: A better understanding of the essential components of frailty is important for future developments of management strategies. We aimed to assess the incremental validity of a Comprehensive Model of Frailty (CMF) over Frailty Index (FI) in predicting self-rated health and functional dependency amongst near-centenarians and centenarians. Design: Cross-sectional, community-based study. Setting: Two community-based social and clinical networks. Participants: One hundred twenty-four community-dwelling Chinese near-centenarians and centenarians. Measurements: Frailty was first assessed using a 32-item FI (FI-32). Then, a new CMF was constructed by adding 12 items in the psychological, social/family, environmental, and economic domains to the FI-32. Hierarchical multiple regressions explored whether the new CMF provided significant additional predictive power for self-rated health and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) dependency. Results: Mean age was 97.7 (standard deviation 2.3) years, with a range from 95 to 108, and 74.2% were female. Overall, 16% of our participants were nonfrail, 59% were prefrail, and 25% were frail. Frailty according to FI-32 significantly predicted self-rated health and IADL dependency beyond the effect of age and gender. Inclusion of the new CMF into the regression models provided significant additional predictive power beyond FI-32 on self-rated health, but not IADL dependency. Conclusions: A CMF should ideally be a multidimensional and multidisciplinary construct including physical, cognitive, functional, psychosocial/family, environmental, and economic factors. Ó 2015 AMDA e The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. With aging, frailty increases the risk of adverse health outcomes when an individual's diminished strength, endurance, and physiological reserve results in the person's inability to withstand environmental stressors. The consequences of frailty are perhaps the major obstacle to healthy and disability-free life years in old age, while consuming a significant proportion of societal resources. Clarity on the operational definition and components of frailty is important for clinical care, research, and policy planning. From the many attempts to systematically review the growing numbers of frailty assessment tools, 2e4 2 of the most commonly used validated approaches are (1) the Frailty Phenotype 5 ; and (2) the Deficit Accumulation model (Frailty Index, FI). The Frailty Phenotype is based on 5 clinical criteria indicating the physical manifestation of physiological aging, including excessive weight loss, exhaustion, slow gait speed, weak handgrip, and sedentary behavior. The FI originally composed of over 70 items indicating cumulative physical and cognitive comorbidities. More recently, shorter lists of 30e40 variables have been validated, such as the 36-item scale in Song et al 7 or the 39-item scale by Gu et al, 8 without loss of predictive power. The essential components that constitute frailty and how these components interact to exacerbate functional disability, comorbidity, and perceived health status are unresolved. Increasingly, researchers and practitioners are also proposing that frailty should shift its focus from organ-or disease-based approaches toward one that is based upon the well-being of the whole person. 9e11 Table summarizes the various commonly used frailty assessment tools and their range of core components in the different domains, including physical, The authors declare no conflicts of interest.