三种评估量表在门诊老年病人衰弱筛查中的应用研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-9198.2022.07.010

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的比较FARIL量表、Fried衰弱表型(FP)及简易体能状态量表(SPPB)在门诊老年病人衰弱筛查中的一致性和适用性。方法选择2020年10月至2021年5月中国人民解放军总医院老年衰弱认知管理门诊就诊的老年病人为研究对象,分别使用FRAIL量表、FP和SPPB对其进行衰弱筛查。采用Kappa值分析三种量表的一致性;以病人的日常生活能力为评定标准,采用ROC曲线和Bayes判别分析评价三种量表的效度及适用性。结果共218例病人参加测评,有效测评188例,有效测评率为86.23%。三种量表筛查出的衰弱病人比例中,FP最高(17.55%),SPPB次之(15.96%),FRAIL量表最低(14.36%);筛查出的衰弱前期病人比例中,FP最高(58.98%),FRAIL次之(52.66%),SPPB最低(25.00%)。FRAIL量表与FP,FRAIL量表与SPPB,FP与SPPB一致性分析的Kappa值分别为0.565、0.401、0.447(P均＜0.001)。ROC曲线分析显示,FRAIL量表、FP和SPPB预测门诊老年病人日常生活能力下降的AUC分别为0.717、0.728、0.786(P均＜0.001),进一步的Bayes判别分析显示,FRAIL量表、FP和SPPB交叉验证的准确率分别为57.4%、75.0%、76.7%。结论 FRAIL量表、FP及SPPB对门诊老年人的衰弱筛查结果中等一致,但FP可能更适合筛查门诊老年人的衰弱及衰弱前期,FP、SPPB对门诊老年人的日常生活能力下降的预测效果较好。

关键词: 评估方法, 门诊, 老年人, 衰弱, 筛查

Abstract: Objective To compare the consistency and applicability of FRAIL scale, Fried frailty phenotype (FP) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) in the screening of frailty in the elderly outpatients. Methods The elderly outpatients in the elderly frailty and cognitive management clinic of Chinese PLA General Hospital from October 2020 to May 2021 were selected as the subjects. FRAIL scale, FP and SPPB were used to screen the frailty among the patients, respectively. The Kappa value was calculated to evaluate the consistency of the three scales. The patient's ability of daily living was used as the evaluation standard, and the validity and applicability of the three scales was evaulated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Bayes discriminant analysis, respectively. Results There were 218 patients undergoing the evaluation, and 188 cases were effective, with an effective evaluation rate of 86.23%. Among the three scales, the proportion of frailty patients screened by FP was the highest (17.55%), followed by SPPB (15.96%), and FRAIL scale (14.36%); The proportion of pre-frailty patients screened by FP was the highest (58.98%), followed by FRAIL scale (52.66%), and SPPB (25.00%). The Kappa value of FRAIL scale vs FP, FRAIL scale vs SPPB, FP vs SPPB was 0.565, 0.401 and 0.447, respectively (all P<0.001). ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the curve (AUC) of FRAIL scale, FP and SPPB in predicting the decline of ability of daily living in the elderly outpatients was 0.717, 0.728 and 0.786, respectively (all P<0.001); Bayes discriminant analysis showed that the cross-verification accuracy rate of FRAIL scale, FP and SPPB was 57.4%, 75.0% and 76.7%, respectively. Conclusions FRAIL scale, FP and SPPB are moderately consistent in the screening results of frailty among the elderly outpatients. Among the three assessment scales, FP is more suitable for screening the frailty and pre-frailty of the elderly outpatients, and FP and SPPB have a good predictive effect on the decline of ability of daily living in the elderly outpatients.

Key words: assessment method, outpatient department, aged, frailty, screening

中图分类号:

R592

杨存美, 胡亦新, 舒刚明, 马虹颖, 周滢, 王怡丹, 靳楠楠. 三种评估量表在门诊老年病人衰弱筛查中的应用研究[J]. 实用老年医学, 2022, 36(7): 688-692.

YANG Cun-mei, HU Yi-xin, SHU Gang-ming, MA Hong-ying, ZHOU Ying, WANG Yi-dan, Jin Nan-nan. Application of three assessment scales in screening for frailty in elderly outpatients[J]. Practical Geriatrics, 2022, 36(7): 688-692.

参考文献

[1] 晋聪聪, 商临萍. 基于成功老龄化视角的老年衰弱风险管控模式研究进展[J]. 护理研究, 2021, 35(11):1963-1967.
[2] SIEBER C C. Frailty - From concept to clinical practice[J]. Exp Gerontol, 2016, 87(Part B):160-167.
[3] 王志燕, 高欢玲, 张红梅, 等. Kihon老年衰弱筛查量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学杂志, 2021, 36(3):10-13.
[4] 韩君, 王君俏, 谢博钦, 等. Fried衰弱表型和FRAIL量表及埃德蒙顿衰弱评估量表在社区高龄老年人衰弱筛查中一致性和适用性的比较研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2021, 24(21):2669-2674.
[5] LI J J, JIANG S, ZHU M L, et al. Comparison of three frailty scales for prediction of adverse outcomes among older adults: a prospective cohort study[J]. J Nutr Heath Aging, 2020, 25(4):419-424.
[6] 李秋萍, 韩斌如. 外科住院老年病人衰弱现状及影响因素的调查分析[J]. 护理研究, 2017, 31(33):4307-4311.
[7] MORLEY J E, MALMSTROM T K, MILLER D K. A simple frailty questionnaire (FRAIL) predicts outcomes in middle aged African Americans[J]. J Nut Health Aging, 2013, 16(7):601-608.
[8] FRIED L P, TANGEN C M, WALSTON J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype[J]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2001, 56(3):M146-M156.
[9] GURALNIK J M, WINOGRAD C H. Physical performance measures in the assessment of older persons[J]. Aging: Milan, 1994, 6(5):303-305.
[10] 鲁俊华, 邹继华, 吕雨梅, 等. 脑卒中后残疾患者伤残接受度水平及其影响因素研究[J]. 中国护理管理, 2015, 15(7):796-799.
[11] 范俊瑶, 刘明婷, 赵慧敏, 等. 老年人社会衰弱的研究进展[J]. 护理学杂志, 2020, 35(2):106-109.
[12] 李丽, 曹学云, 陈冬玲, 等. 老年高血压患者家庭治疗方案执行情况及影响因素分析[J].慢性病学杂志, 2018, 19(7):876-880.
[13] COLLARD R M, BOTER H, SCHOEVERS R A, et al. Prevalence of frailty in community-dwelling older persons:a systematic review[J]. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2012, 60(8):1487-1492.
[14] 任青卓, 周静静, 郑雅婧, 等. 广州市老年人衰弱现状及其影响因素[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2019, 35(4):413-417.
[15] 赵雅宜, 丁亚萍, 李现文, 等. 南京市养老机构老年人衰弱现状及危险因素分析[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2018, 34(4):550-553.
[16] 杨影红, 曾幸坤, 褚娇娇, 等. 门诊老年患者衰弱现状调查及相关影响因素分析[J]. 浙江医学, 2018, 40(10):1050-1053.
[17] 中华医学会老年医学分会, 郝秋奎, 李峻, 等. 老年患者衰弱评估与干预中国专家共识[J]. 中华老年医学杂志, 2017, 36(3):251-256.
[18] 韩君, 王君俏, 谢博钦, 等. Fried衰弱表型和FRAIL量表及埃德蒙顿衰弱评估量表在社区高龄老年人衰弱筛查中一致性和适用性的比较研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2021, 24(21):2669-2674.
[19] VERMEULEN J, NEYENS J C L, VAN ROSSUM E, et al. Predicting ADL disability in community-dwelling elderly people using physical frailty indicators: a systematic review[J]. BMC Geriatr, 2011, 11:33.
[20] FRIED L P, FERRUCCI L, DARER J, al. Untangling the concepts of disability, frailty, and comorbidity: implications for improved targeting and care[J]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2004, 59(3):255-263.
[21] GOBBENS R J J, VAN ASSEN M A L M. The prediction of quality of life by physical, psychological and social components of frailty in community-dwelling older people[J]. Qual Life Res, 2014, 23(8):2289-2300.
[22] 李凌, 王玉梅, 张艳玲, 等. 老年病人衰弱综合征与肌肉功能的相关性研究[J]. 护理研究, 2019, 33(6):917-920.
[23] TREACY D, HASSETT L. The short physical performance battery[J]. J Physiother, 2017, 64(1):61.