A multidisciplinary systematic literature review on frailty: Overview of the methodology used by the Canadian Initiative on Frailty and Aging

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Over the past two decades, there has been a substantial growth in the body of literature on frailty in older persons. However, there is no consensus on its definition or the criteria used to identify frailty. In response to this lack of consensus, the Canadian Initiative on Frailty and Aging carried out a set of systematic reviews of the literature in ten areas of frailty research: biological basis; social basis; prevalence; risk factors; impact; identification; prevention and management; environment and technology; health services; health and social policy. This paper describes the methodology that was developed for the systematic reviews.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A Central Coordination Group (CCG) was responsible for developing the methodology. This involved the development of search strategies and keywords, article selection processes, quality assessment tools, and guidelines for the synthesis of results. Each review was conducted by two experts in the content area, with the assistance of methodologists and statisticians from the CCG.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Conducting a series of systematic literature reviews involving a range of disciplines on a concept that does not have a universally accepted definition posed several conceptual and methodological challenges. The most important conceptual challenge was determining what would qualify as literature on frailty. The methodological challenges arose from our goal of structuring a consistent methodology for reviewing literature from diverse fields of research. At the outset, certain methodological guidelines were deemed essential to ensure the validity of all the reviews. Nevertheless, it was equally important to permit flexibility in the application of the proposed methodology to capture the essence of frailty research within the given fields.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results of these reviews allowed us to establish the status of current knowledge on frailty and promote collaboration between disciplines. Conducting systematic literature reviews in health science that involve multiple disciplines is a mechanism to facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration and a more integrated understanding of health. This initiative highlighted the need for further methodological development in the performance of multidisciplinary systematic reviews.</p

Modified bathroom scale and balance assessment: a comparison with clinical tests

Frailty and detection of fall risk are major issues in preventive gerontology. A simple tool frequently used in daily life, a bathroom scale (balance quality tester: BQT), was modified to obtain information on the balance of 84 outpatients consulting at a geriatric clinic. The results computed from the BQT were compared to the values of three geriatric tests that are widely used either to detect a fall risk or frailty (timed get up and go: TUG; 10 m walking speed: WS; walking time: WT; one-leg stand: OS). The BQT calculates four parameters that are then scored and weighted, thus creating an overall indicator of balance quality. Raw data, partial scores and the global score were compared with the results of the three geriatric tests. The WT values had the highest correlation with BQT raw data (r = 0.55), while TUG (r = 0.53) and WS (r = 0.56) had the highest correlation with BQT partial scores. ROC curves for OS cut-off values (4 and 5 s) were produced, with the best results obtained for a 5 s cut-off, both with the partial scores combined using Fisher's combination (specificity 85 %: 0.48), and with the empirical score (specificity 85 %: 8). A BQT empirical score of less than seven can detect fall risk in a community dwelling population

Mentoring at the University of Pennsylvania: Results of a Faculty Survey

BACKGROUND: Research suggests mentoring is related to career satisfaction and success. Most studies have focused on junior faculty. OBJECTIVE: To explore multiple aspects of mentoring at an academic medical center in relation to faculty rank, track, and gender. DESIGN: Cross-sectional mail survey in mid-2003. PARTICIPANTS: Faculty members, 1,432, at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine MEASUREMENTS: Self-administered survey developed from existing instruments and stakeholders. RESULTS: Response rate was 73% (n = 1,046). Most (92%) assistant and half (48%) of associate professors had a mentor. Assistant professors in the tenure track were most likely to have a mentor (98%). At both ranks, the faculty was given more types of advice than types of opportunities. Satisfaction with mentoring was correlated with the number of types of mentoring received (r = .48 and .53, P < .0001), job satisfaction (r = .44 and .31, P < .0001), meeting frequency (r = .53 and .61, P < .0001), and expectation of leaving the University within 5 years (Spearman r = −.19 and −.18, P < .0001), at the assistant and associate rank, respectively. Significant predictors of higher overall job satisfaction were associate rank [Odds ratio (OR) = 2.04, CI = 1.29–3.21], the 10-point mentoring satisfaction rating (OR = 1.27, CI = 1.17–1.35), and number of mentors (OR = 1.60, CI = 1.20–2.07). CONCLUSIONS: Having a mentor, or preferably, multiple mentors is strongly related to satisfaction with mentoring and overall job satisfaction. Surprisingly, few differences were related to gender. Mentoring of clinician–educators, research track faculty, and senior faculty, and the use of multiple mentors require specific attention of academic leadership and further study

"Touchscreen Assessment Tool" (TATOO), an Assessment Tool Based on the Expanded Conceptual Model of Frailty

Frailty is a common clinical syndrome in older adults; it carries an increased risk of negative health events and outcomes including falls, incident disability, hospitalization, and mortality. Therefore, it is critical to identify high-risk subsets of the elderly population and explore new arenas for frailty prevention and treatment. This chapter will provide an overview of the current state of assessment models for frailty syndrome in the elderly and will describe a new assessment tool based on mobile technology, which takes account and advantage of the ways in which elderly people interact with a touchscreen. While healthcare providers and researchers in the field of aging have long been aware of the changing characteristics and needs of older people living in the community, there has not been any marked change in frailty syndrome assessment models until now. In the twenty-first century world with its technological advancements, the elderly require new, special physical skills combining perceptual, motor, and cognitive abilities for their functional daily activities and for maintaining their independence and quality of life

A national survey on violence and discrimination among people with disabilities

Background: The aim of the study was to quantify levels of violence and discrimination among people with disabilities and analyze the effects of gender and the type and degree of disability. Methods: The study analyzed data on self-reported violence and discrimination from a Danish national survey of 18,019 citizens, of whom 4519 reported a physical disability and 1398 reported a mental disability. Results: Individuals with disabilities reported significantly higher levels of violence than those without. Specifically, individuals reporting a mental disability reported higher levels of violence and discrimination. Significant gender differences were found with regard to type of violence: while men with disabilities were more likely to report physical violence, women with disabilities were more likely to report major sexual violence, humiliation and discrimination. Neither severity nor visibility of disability was found to be a significant factor for risk of violence. Conclusions: This large-scale study lends support to existing research showing that people with disabilities are at greater risk of violence than people without disabilities. Further, the study found that people with mental disabilities were significantly more likely to report all types of violence and discrimination than those with physical disabilities. The findings also show that gender is significant in explaining the type of violence experienced and the experience of discrimination