Comparative Study of Frailty Phenotype and Short Physical Performance Battery for Frailty Assessment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Sharmistha Dutta, Nitin Goel, Raj Kumar
Keywords :
Chronic obstructive, Frailty, Pulmonary disease, Quality of life, Six-minute walk test
Citation Information :
Dutta S, Goel N, Kumar R. Comparative Study of Frailty Phenotype and Short Physical Performance Battery for Frailty Assessment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci 2024; 66 (4):124-131.
Aim and background: Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome of physical and cognitive impairments predisposing patients to increased risk of hospitalizations and poorer health-related quality of life. We conducted this study with the aim of comparing the frailty phenotype (FP) and short physical performance battery (SPPB) methods for the assessment of frailty in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Materials and methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in 150 stable COPD patients. Frailty was assessed using the FP and SPPB methods, followed by a comparative evaluation of the two methods.
Results: The prevalence of frailty was 51.33% (n = 77) by the FP method and 21.33% (n = 32) by SPPB. Frail patients in both groups had the lowest post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (%) (p < 0.0001). The median St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score was highest in the Frail group by the FP method [43.21 (32.116–58.338)] and pre-frail group by SPPB [43.47 (30.913–59.02)] (p = 0.007). The association between FP and SPPB was significant but with poor inter-rater kappa agreement (0.196, p = 0.0001). Frailty phenotype method showed a significant positive correlation, whereas SPPB had a significant negative correlation with duration of dyspnea (r = 0.3; r = –0.269), frequency of exacerbations (r = 0.498; r = –0.548), mMRC score (r = 0.525; r = –0.408), CAT score (r = 0.478; r = –0.52) and pack-years of smoking (r = 0.301; r = –0.278). Six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance had a significant association with frailty (p < 0.0001) by both methods.
Conclusion: Frailty phenotype is a more sensitive method of frailty assessment in COPD compared to SPPB and correlates better with the severity of the disease. However, both methods showed a significant positive correlation with distance covered in 6MWT.
Clinical significance: The FP and SPPB both identified a group of stable COPD patients with frailty. Our study underscores the importance of early identification and timely intervention to prevent deconditioning of muscular and cardiovascular systems which can otherwise progress to frailty.
Woo J, Yu R, Wong M, et al. Frailty screening in the community using the FRAIL scale. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2015;16(5):412–419. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.01.087.
Yee N, Locke ER, Pike KC, et al. Frailty in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and risk of exacerbations and hospitalizations. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2020;11:1967–1976. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S245505.
Marengoni A, Vetrano DL, Manes-Gravina E, et al. The relationship between COPD and frailty: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Chest 2018;154(1):21–40. DOI:10.1016/j.chest.2018.02.014.
Brighton LJ, Nolan CM, Barker RE, et al. Frailty and mortality risk in COPD: A cohort study comparing the fried frailty phenotype and short physical performance battery. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2023;31:57–67. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S375142.
Singer JP, Lederer DJ, Baldwin MR. Frailty in pulmonary and critical care medicine. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2016;13(8):1394–1404. DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201512-833FR.
Morley JE, Vellas B, van Kan GA, et al. Frailty consensus: A call to action. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2013;14(6):392–397. DOI:10.1016/j. jamda.2013.03.022.
Valenza MC, Torres-Sánchez I, Cabrera-Martos I, et al. Physical activity as a predictor of absence of frailty in subjects with stable COPD and COPD exacerbation. Respir Care 2016;61(2):212–219. DOI: 10.4187/respcare.04118.
Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: Evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56(3):M146–M157. DOI: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146.
Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: Association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol 1994;49(2):M85–M94. DOI: 10.1093/geronj/49.2.m85.
Rockwood K, Hogan DB, MacKnight C. Conceptualization and measurement of frailty in elderly people. Drugs Aging 2000;17:295–302. DOI: 10.2165/00002512-200017040-00005.
Chan DC, Tsou HH, Chen CY, et al. Validation of the Chinese-Canadian study of health and aging clinical frailty scale (CSHA-CFS) telephone version. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2010;50(3):e74–e80. DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2009.06.004.
Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, et al. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing 2006;35(5):526–552. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afl041.
Limpawattana P, Putraveephong S, Inthasuwan P, et al. Frailty syndrome in ambulatory patients with COPD. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2017;12:1193. DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S134233.
Patel MS, Mohan D, Andersson YM, et al. Phenotypic characteristics associated with reduced short physical performance battery score in COPD. Chest 2014;145(5):1016–1024. DOI: 10.1378/chest.13-1398.
Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Management and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Available from: https://goldcopd.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/GOLD-2021-REPORT-ver1.0wms.pdf. Accessed on 20th May, 2021.
Graham BL, Steenbruggen I, Miller MR, et al. Standardization of spirometry 2019 update. An official American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society technical statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019;200(8):e70–e88. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201908-1590ST.
Stanojevic S, Kaminsky DA, Miller MR, et al. ERS/ATS technical standard on interpretive strategies for routine lung function tests. Eur Respir J 2022 Jul 1;60(1):2101499. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01499-2021.
Gilbertson L, Barber-Lomax S. Power and pinch grip strength recorded using the hand-held Jamar® dynamometer and B+ L hydraulic pinch gauge: British normative data for adults. Br J Occup Ther 1994;57(12):483–488. DOI: 10.1177/030802269405701209.
Lewinsohn PM, Seeley JR, Roberts RE, et al. Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) as a screening instrument for depression among community-residing older adults. Psychol Aging 1997;12(2):277. DOI: 10.1037//0882-7974.12.2.277.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. How much physical activity do you need. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/basics/adults/index.htm. Accessed on 25th May, 2021.
Eakin EG, Resnikoff PM, Prewitt LM, et al. Validation of a new dyspnea measure: The UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire. Chest 1998;113(3):619–624. DOI: 10.1378/chest.113.3.619.
Enright PL. The six-minute walk test. Respir Care 2003;48(8):783–785. PMID: 12890299.
Casanova C, Marin JM, Martinez-Gonzalez C, et al. Differential effect of modified medical research council dyspnea, COPD assessment test, and clinical COPD questionnaire for symptoms evaluation within the new GOLD staging and mortality in COPD. Chest 2015;148(1):159–168. DOI:10.1378/chest.14-2449.
Jones PW, Quirk FH, Baveystock CM. The St George's respiratory questionnaire. Respir Med 1991;85:25–31. DOI: 10.1016/s0954-6111(06)80166-6.
Gale NS, Albarrati AM, Munnery MM, et al. Frailty: A global measure of the multisystem impact of COPD. Chron Respir Dis 2018;15(4):347–355. DOI: 10.1177/1479972317752763.
Morley JE, Malmstrom TK, Miller DK. A simple frailty questionnaire (FRAIL) predicts outcomes in middle-aged African Americans. J Nutr Health Aging 2012;16(7):601–608. DOI: 10.1007/s12603-012-0084-2.
Naing L, Winn T, Rusli BN. Practical issues in calculating the sample size for prevalence studies. Arch Orofac Sci 2006;1:9–14.
Kennedy CC, Novotny PJ, LeBrasseur NK, et al. Frailty and clinical outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2019;16(2):217–224. DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201803-175OC.