Please wait a minute...
 Home  About the Journal Editorial Board Aims & Scope Peer Review Policy Subscription Contact us
 
Early Edition  //  Current Issue  //  Open Special Issues  //  Archives  //  Most Read  //  Most Downloaded  //  Most Cited
Aging and disease    2018, Vol. 9 Issue (2) : 192-207     DOI: 10.14336/AD.2017.0429
Orginal Article |
The Prevalence of Frailty and its Associated Factors in Japanese Hemodialysis Patients
Takeuchi Hidemi1,7, Uchida Haruhito A.1,2,*, Kakio Yuki1, Okuyama Yuka1, Okuyama Michihiro3, Umebayashi Ryoko1, Wada Kentaro4, Sugiyama Hitoshi1,5, Sugimoto Ken6, Rakugi Hiromi6, Wada Jun1
1Department of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan.
2Department of Chronic Kidney Disease and Cardiovascular Disease, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan.
3Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Okayama University Hospital, Okayama, Japan.
4Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Internal Medicine, Nippon Kokan Fukuyama Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan.
5Department of Human Resource Development of Dialysis Therapy for Kidney Disease, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan.
6Department of Geriatric and General Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
7Department of Internal Medicine, Innoshima General Hospital, Hiroshima, Japan
Download: PDF(1251 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    
Abstract  

The population undergoing dialysis is aging worldwide, particularly in Japan. The clinical condition of frailty is the most problematic expression in the elderly population. Potential pathophysiological factors of frailty present in patients with CKD and are accentuated in patients with ESRD. The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence and predictors of frailty in Japanese HD patients. This study was a multicenter, cross-sectional and observational investigation conducted at 6 institutions. To evaluate frailty, the modified Fried’s frailty phenotype adjusted for Japanese as the self-reported questionnaire was used. Of the 542 patients visiting each institution, 388 were enrolled in this study. In total, 26.0% of participants were categorized as not-frailty, 52.6% as pre-frailty and 21.4% as frailty. The prevalence of frailty increased steadily with age and was more prevalent in females than in males and the subjects with frailty received polypharmacy. A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the factors independently associated with frailty were the following: female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 3.661, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.398-9.588), age (OR = 1.065, 95% CI 1.014-1.119), age ≥ 75 years old (OR = 4.892, 95% CI 1.715-13.955), body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 (OR = 0.110, 95% CI 0.0293-0.416), number of medications being taken (OR = 1.351, 95% CI 1.163-1.570), diabetes mellitus (DM) (OR = 2.765, 95% CI 1.081-7.071) and MNA-SF ≤ 11 (OR = 7.405, 95% CI 2.732-20.072). Frailty was associated with the accumulation of risk factors. The prevalence of frailty in Japanese patients with HD was relatively lower than that previously reported in Western developed countries; however, it was extremely high compared to the general population regardless of age. Our findings suggest that frailty might be associated with an increase in the prevalence of adverse health outcomes in patients with HD.

Keywords Frailty      Dialysis      Frailty phenotype     
Corresponding Authors: Uchida Haruhito A.   
About author:

These authors contributed equally to this work.

Issue Date: 01 April 2018
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Takeuchi Hidemi
Uchida Haruhito A.
Kakio Yuki
Okuyama Yuka
Okuyama Michihiro
Umebayashi Ryoko
Wada Kentaro
Sugiyama Hitoshi
Sugimoto Ken
Rakugi Hiromi
Wada Jun
Cite this article:   
Takeuchi Hidemi,Uchida Haruhito A.,Kakio Yuki, et al. The Prevalence of Frailty and its Associated Factors in Japanese Hemodialysis Patients[J]. Aging and disease, 2018, 9(2): 192-207.
URL:  
http://www.aginganddisease.org/EN/10.14336/AD.2017.0429     OR     http://www.aginganddisease.org/EN/Y2018/V9/I2/192
CriteriaDefinition
Weight LossUnintentional weight loss ≥ 2 kg in the previous year
Poor EndurancePositive answer to a self-reported question, about how the participant had felt in the last 2 weeks: “Did you feel exhausted without any reason?”
WeaknessGrip strength by gender
Males: < 26.0 kg, Females: < 18.0 kg
SlownessPositive answer to either of two self-reported questions, if participants were asked about their walking speed: “Are you unable to walk at a pace of ≥ 1.0 m/sec?”, “Is it hard for you to cross over a crosswalk within the time allotted?”
Low activityNegative answer to both of two self-reported questions, on the participants’ activity: “Do you lightly exercise or work at least once a week?”, “Do you regularly play any sports at least once a week?”
Table 1  Operational definition of the frailty phenotype in the present study
Figure 1.  Diagram of participants enrolled in this study.
Figure 2.  Number of frailty criteria present; Prevalence of Frailty status.
Figure 3.  The Ratio of the Frailty Phenotypes according to the Duration of Dialysis and Age. The upper panel shows the ratio of the frailty phenotypes according to the duration of dialysis. The lower panel shows the ratio of the frailty phenotypes according to the age.
VariableNot frail
(n = 101)
Pre-Frail
(n = 204)
Frail
(n = 83)
P value
Age, (years)63.6 ± 11.267.5 ± 12.371.0 ± 10.2< 0.001**
Gender (male), n (%)70 (69.3 %)135 (66.2 %)37 (44.6 %)< 0.001**
Height, (cm)162.0 ± 8.9159.7 ± 9.3155.2 ± 9.0< 0.001**
Weight, (kg)56.0 ± 11.156.6 ± 12.152.9 ± 10.40.043*
Body mass index, (kg/m2)21.2 ± 3.422.1 ± 3.521.9 ± 3.80.155
Brachial circumference, (cm)25.3 ± 3.125.3 ± 3.224.8 ± 2.90.481
Rt. Femoral circumference, (cm)42.4 ± 5.441.5 ± 5.240.0 ± 5.00.007**
Lt. Femoral circumference (cm)42.5 ± 5.141.0 ± 5.139.8 ± 4.80.006**
Grip strength, (kg)26.5 ± 9.722.1 ± 11.115.8 ± 7.5< 0.001**
Rt. ABI1.13 ± 0.191.12 ± 0.231.07 ± 0.260.123
Lt. ABI1.11 ± 0.171.10 ± 0.231.07 ± 0.240.485
Hb, (g/dL)10.8 ± 1.010.8 ± 1.010.7 ± 1.00.517
Alb, (g/dL)3.7 ± 0.83.6 ± 0.33.5 ± 0.40.003**
T-Chol, (mg/dL)163 ± 40159 ± 41154 ± 400.363
UN, (mg/dL)63.7 ± 14.363.2 ± 17.360.2 ± 20.10.338
Cr, (mg/dL)10.76 ± 5.139.44 ± 2.418.35 ± 2.17<0.001**
Number of oral medications9.3 ± 3.29.9 ± 3.712.1 ± 3.8< 0.001**
Dementia drugs used, n (%)0 (0.0 %)5 (2.5 %)3 (3.6 %)0.195
Smoker (current + former), n (%)54 (53.5 %)89 (43.6 %)30 (36.1 %)0.058
History of falling, n (%)15 (14.9 %)52 (25.5 %)30 (36.1 %)0.004**
Dialysis frequency, (sessions/week)3.0 ± 0.13.0 ± 0.23.0 ± 0.30.328
Dialysis time, (hour/session)4.1 ± 0.34.1 ± 0.34.1 ± 0.40.559
Duration of dialysis, (years)8.6 ± 7.38.3 ± 7.49.5 ± 8.40.431
spKt/V urea1.48 ± 0.371.46 ± 0.391.50 ± 0.400.744
nPCR, (g/kg/day)0.87 ± 0.120.87 ± 0.160.84 ± 0.200.336
GNRI95.3 ± 14.295.6 ± 8.693.5 ± 10.10.313
MNA-SF11.9 ± 2.111.7 ± 1.810.2 ± 2.6<0.001**
Etiology of ESRD
CGN, n (%)47 (46.5 %)50 (24.5 %)20 (24.1 %)< 0.001**
DN, n (%)24 (23.8 %)75 (36.8 %)39 (47.0 %)0.004**
NS, n (%)9 (8.9 %)17 (8.3 %)1 (1.2 %)0.066
PKD, n (%)2 (2.0 %)8 (3.9 %)3 (3.6 %)0.667
Others, n (%)7 (6.9 %)22 (10.8 %)8 (9.6 %)0.559
Unknown, n (%)12 (11.9 %)32 (15.7 %)12 (14.5 %)0.673
HTN, n (%)76 (75.2 %)151 (74.0 %)60 (72.3 %)0.901
DLP, n (%)16 (15.8 %)47 (23.0 %)20 (24.1 %)0.281
DM, n (%)26 (25.7 %)89 (43.6 %)47 (56.6 %)< 0.001**
IHD, n (%)21 (20.8 %)48 (23.5 %)20 (24.1 %)0.833
STK, n (%)8 (7.9 %)27 (13.2 %)19 (22.9 %)0.013*
PAD, n (%)13 (14.0 %)29 (16.5 %)21 (28.4 %)0.038*
MLG, n (%)7 (6.9 %)20 (9.8 %)8 (9.6 %)0.695
BF, n (%)5 (5.0 %)22 (10.8 %)11 (13.3 %)0.133
Table 2  Characteristics of each frailty phenotype.
Pre-Frail
Frail
Odds ratio95% CIP valueOdds ratio95% CIP value
Female1.1540.691-1.9270.5842.8071.533-5.141< 0.001**
Age, years1.0271.007-1.0480.009**1.0721.037-1.107< 0.001**
Age ≥ 65 y.o.1.2730.784-2.0670.3292.7881.450-5.3590.002**
Age ≥ 75 y.o.3.3901.733-6.635< 0.001**5.9662.840-12.529< 0.001**
BMI ≥ 25.02.1211.041-4.3240.038*1.6600.710-3.8830.242
BMI <18.50.6540.361-1.1880.1630.4120.179-0.9490.037*
DN1.8651.088-3.1990.023*2.8441.516-5.3350.001**
HTN0.9740.561-1.6920.9250.8580.444-1.6600.649
DLP1.6320.872-3.0530.1251.6870.810-3.5130.163
DM2.2721.343-3.8420.002**3.7762.021-7.018< 0.001**
IHD1.1950.669-2.1340.5471.2090.603-2.4250.592
STK1.7830.779-4.0820.1713.4511.424-8.3640.006**
PAD1.2140.598-2.4660.5922.4381.125-5.2870.024*
MLG1.4680.599-3.5950.4011.4320.497-4.1290.506
BF2.3340.857-6.3570.0972.9330.976-8.8160.055
Fall1.9911.057-3.7510.033*3.2081.580-6.5140.001**
Smoking0.6800.419-1.1050.1190.4720.260-0.8570.014*
NOM1.0440.974-1.1190.2211.2561.140-1.383< 0.001**
Hypo-Alb1.3050.754-2.2610.3411.9131.010-3.6220.047*
Hypo-Chol1.0860.671-1.7580.7361.3820.771-2.4770.278
spKt/V ≥1.800.8440.464-1.5350.5781.2900.647-2.5720.469
spKt/V <0.803.5530.431-29.2810.2391.2200.075-19.7980.889
nPCR <0.901.0180.629-1.6460.9441.2300.681-2.2230.492
GNRI ≤910.9010.542-1.4970.6871.5090.829-2.7470.178
MNA-SF ≤111.3160.804-2.1540.2753.9582.135-7.338< 0.001**
Table 3  Univariate predictors of frail and pre-frail.
Figure 4.  The Ratio of Frailty Phenotypes according to the MNA-SF Score. P value was obtained by chi-square test.
Pre-Frail
Frail
Odds ratio95% CIP valueOdds ratio95% CIP value
Female1.3800.759-2.5090.2923.6611.398-9.5880.008**
Age1.0261.004-1.0490.019*1.0651.014-1.1190.013*
BMI ≥ 25.02.4631.079-5.6230.032*
BMI <18.50.1100.0293-0.4160.001**
NOM1.0380.954-1.1300.3831.3511.163-1.570< 0.001**
DM2.2741.203-4.2960.011*2.7651.081-7.0710.034*
IHD0.8820.414-1.8770.7441.0260.331-3.1810.964
STK1.3830.524-3.6530.5133.1360.824-11.9290.094
PAD0.7750.337-1.7830.5482.3140.730-7.3320.154
MLG1.3820.517-3.6920.5190.8770.170-4.5350.876
BF1.6120.469-5.5410.4491.4150.247-8.0970.696
Fall1.1760.559-2.4730.6701.5260.468-4.9780.483
MNA-SF ≤111.4480.817-2.5670.2057.4052.732-20.072< 0.001**
Table 4  Multivariate Analysis of predictors for frail and pre-frail.
Pre-Frail
Frail Model 1
Frail Model 2
Odds ratio95% CIP valueOdds ratio95% CIP valueOdds ratio95% CIP value
Female1.6500.889-3.0640.1133.5811.395-9.1900.008**3.7331.413-9.8580.008**
Age ≥ 65 y.o.2.4290.894-6.5990.082
Age ≥ 75 y.o.3.9281.827-8.447<0.001**4.8921.715-13.9550.003**
BMI ≥ 25.02.7311.196-6.3280.017*
BMI <18.50.1040.0281-0.383< 0.001**0.1290.0335-0.4990.003**
NOM1.0350.949-1.1300.4331.3441.161-1.556< 0.001**1.3891.192-1.618<0.001**
DM2.7041.400-5.2260.003**2.8641.125-7.2940.027*2.8111.069-7.3870.036*
IHD0.8860.410-1.9160.7581.0760.355-3.2590.8970.9290.293-2.9500.901
STK1.2600.467-3.4030.6483.3920.921-12.4930.0663.4140.921-12.6580.066
PAD0.6870.292-1.6190.3912.1760.681-6.9460.1892.6130.805-8.4810.110
MLG1.4500.528-3.9790.4710.9160.175-4.7880.9170.9100.174-4.7630.911
BF1.6620.464-5.9480.4351.6600.297-9.2960.5641.3680.226-8.2960.733
Fall1.1800.551-2.5290.6701.5980.483-5.2850.4431.6530.505-5.4090.406
Hypo-Alb1.2020.618-2.3390.5881.8840.684-5.1890.2211.7320.617-4.8580.297
MNA-SF ≤111.5290.884-2.8660.1217.2072.702-19.221< 0.001**7.6092.742-21.115<0.001**
Table 5  Multivariate Analysis of predictors for frail and pre-frail, categorized as elderly criteria.
Figure 5.  Details of MNA-SF Score. Panel (A) shows the proportion of MNA-SF criteria A: “Has food intake declined over the past 3 months due to loss of appetite, digestive problems, chewing or swallowing difficulties?” in each frailty status. Panel (B) shows the proportion of MNA-SF criteria B: Weight loss during the last 3 months, in each frailty status. Panel (C) shows the proportion of MNA-SF criteria C: Mobility, in each frailty status. Panel (D) shows the proportion of MNA-SF criteria D: “Has suffered psychological stress or acute disease in the past 3 months?” in each frailty status. Panel (E) shows the proportion of MNA-SF criteria E: Neuropsychological problems, in each frailty status. (F) shows the proportion of MNA-SF criteria F1: Body Mass Index or F2: Calf circumference, in each frailty status. P values were obtained by chi-square tests.
Figure 6.  Prevalence of Frailty Phenotypes according to the Number of Cardiovascular Disease and the Number of General Risk Factors. The upper panel shows the prevalence of frailty phenotypes according to the number of the cardiovascular disease. The lower panel shows the prevalence of frailty phenotypes according to the number of the general risk factors for frailty. Cardiovascular diseases are ischemic heart disease, stroke and peripheral artery disease. The general risk factors for frailty are ischemic heart disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease, malignancy, obesity, bone fracture, hypoalbuminemia and/or diabetes. P value were obtained by chi-square tests.
VariableCompletely filled
(n = 388)
Incompletely filled
(n = 25)
P-Value
Age, (years)67.2 ± 11.971.9 ± 11.20.054
Gender (male), n (%)242 (62.4 %)14 (56.0 %)0.672
Height, (cm)159.4 ± 9.4158.9 ± 9.40.817
Weight, (kg)55.7 ± 11.554.3 ± 11.30.561
Body mass index, (kg/m2)21.8 ± 3.521.3 ± 3.40.483
Hb, (g/dL)10.8 ± 1.010.9 ± 1.00.587
Alb, (g/dL)3.6 ± 0.53.6 ± 0.30.845
T-Chol, (mg/dL)159 ± 41159 ± 410.979
UN, (mg/dL)62.7 ± 17.268.2 ± 16.10.117
Cr, (mg/dL)9.55 ± 3.398.48 ± 1.810.119
Number of medications10.2 ± 3.710.2 ± 4.10.941
Dialysis frequency, (sessions/week)3.0 ± 0.23.0 ± 0.00.944
Dialysis time, (hours/session)4.1 ± 0.44.1 ± 0.60.655
Duration of dialysis, (years)8.7 ± 7.65.5 ± 6.00.036
spKt/V urea1.29 ± 0.341.30 ± 0.430.487
nPCR, (g/kg/day)0.87 ± 0.160.89 ± 0.170.417
GNRI95.2 ± 10.394.5 ± 8.20.766
MNA-SF11.5 ± 2.210.4 ± 2.60.017
Brachial circumference, (cm)25.2 ± 3.125.3 ± 3.90.918
Rt. Femoral circumference, (cm)41.4 ± 5.342.0 ± 5.40.624
Lt. Femoral circumference (cm)41.1 ± 5.142.3 ± 4.90.314
Grip strength, (kg)22.0 ± 10.723.6 ± 9.40.501
Blank responses in questionnaire
0388 (100 %)0 (0 %)
10 (0 %)12 (85.7 %)
20 (0 %)0 (0 %)
30 (0 %)2 (14.3 %)
“Yes” to frailty questionnaire
0101 (26.0 %)9 (64.3 %)
1118 (30.4 %)8 (57.1 %)
286 (22.2 %)6 (42.9 %)
359 (15.2 %)2 (14.3 %)
419 (4.9 %)0 (0 %)
55 (1.3 %)0 (0 %)
Supplementary Table 1  The baseline characteristics of all participants.
Pre-Frail
Frail
Odds ratio95% CIP valueOdds ratio95% CIP value
Univariate Analysis
Height, cm1.0080.987-1.0300.4380.9380.912-0.965<0.001**
Weight, kg1.0160.998-1.0340.0840.9720.949-0.9940.015*
BMI, kg/m21.0420.984-1.1030.1581.0110.945-1.0820.784
BC, cm1.0280.964-1.0970.3970.9540.880-1.0330.245
Mean FC, cm1.0070.970-1.0450.7080.9330.888-0.9790.005**
Larger FC, cm1.0040.966-1.0430.8510.9310.886-0.9780.004**
Smaller FC, cm1.0070.968-1.0480.7270.9270.881-0.9760.004**
Grip Strength, kg0.9630.941-0.9860.002**0.8650.825-0.907<0.001**
Multivariate Analysis
Grip Strength, kg0.9640.935-0.9930.016*0.8590.810-0.911<0.001**
Supplementary Table 2  Physical Association of Frail and Pre-Frail.
Correlation Coefficient: rP value
Height, cm-0.238<0.001**
Weight, kg-0.1190.02*
BMI, kg/m20.02570.614
Grip Strength, kg-0.340<0.001**
BC, cm-0.07800.127
Mean FC, cm-0.165<0.001**
Larger FC, cm-0.193<0.001**
Smaller FC, cm-0.182<0.001**
Supplementary Table 3  Correlation between the frailty phenotype score and physical domain.
[1] GBD2015 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators (2016). Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet, 388: 1459-1544
[2] GBD2015 DALYs and HALE Collaborators (2016). Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 315 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE), 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet, 388: 1603-1658
[3] Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K (2013). Frailty in elderly people. Lancet, 381: 752-762
[4] Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, et al. (2001). Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 56: M146-156
[5] Woods NF, LaCroix AZ, Gray SL, Aragaki A, Cochrane BB, Brunner RL, et al. (2005). Frailty: emergence and consequences in women aged 65 and older in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study. J Am Geriatr Soc, 53: 1321-1330
[6] Bartali B, Frongillo EA, Bandinelli S, Lauretani F, Semba RD, Fried LP, et al. (2006). Low nutrient intake is an essential component of frailty in older persons. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 61: 589-593
[7] Buchman AS, Boyle PA, Wilson RS, Tang Y, Bennett DA (2007). Frailty is associated with incident Alzheimer’s disease and cognitive decline in the elderly. Psychosom Med, 69: 483-489
[8] Handforth C, Clegg A, Young C, Simpkins S, Seymour MT, Selby PJ, et al. (2015). The prevalence and outcomes of frailty in older cancer patients: a systematic review. Ann Oncol, 26: 1091-1101
[9] Musso CG, Jauregui JR, Macias Nunez JF (2015). Frailty phenotype and chronic kidney disease: a review of the literature. Int Urol Nephrol, 47: 1801-1807
[10] Masakane I, Nakai S, Ogata S, Kimata N, Hanafusa N, Hamano T, et al. (2015). An Overview of Regular Dialysis Treatment in Japan (As of 31 December 2013). Ther Apher Dial, 19: 540-574
[11] Kim JC, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Kopple JD (2013). Frailty and protein-energy wasting in elderly patients with end stage kidney disease. J Am Soc Nephrol, 24: 337-351
[12] Yamada M, Arai H, Nishiguchi S, Kajiwara Y, Yoshimura K, Sonoda T, et al. (2013). Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for long-term care insurance (LTCI) need certification among older Japanese adults: a two-year prospective cohort study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr, 57: 328-332
[13] Chen S, Honda T, Chen T, Narazaki K, Haeuchi Y, Supartini A, et al. (2015). Screening for frailty phenotype with objectively-measured physical activity in a west Japanese suburban community: evidence from the Sasaguri Genkimon Study. BMC Geriatr, 15: 36
[14] Makizako H, Shimada H, Doi T, Tsutsumimoto K, Suzuki T (2015). Impact of physical frailty on disability in community-dwelling older adults: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open, 5: e008462
[15] Shinzato T, Nakai S, Fujita Y, Takai I, Morita H, Nakane K, et al. (1994). Determination of Kt/V and protein catabolic rate using pre- and postdialysis blood urea nitrogen concentrations. Nephron, 67: 280-290
[16] Depner TA, Daugirdas JT (1996). Equations for normalized protein catabolic rate based on two-point modeling of hemodialysis urea kinetics. J Am Soc Nephrol, 7: 780-785
[17] Kobayashi I, Ishimura E, Kato Y, Okuno S, Yamamoto T, Yamakawa T, et al. (2010). Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index, a simplified nutritional screening index, is a significant predictor of mortality in chronic dialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 25: 3361-3365
[18] Lilamand M, Kelaiditi E, Cesari M, Raynaud-Simon A, Ghisolfi A, Guyonnet S, et al. (2015). Validation of the Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form in a Population of Frail Elders without Disability. Analysis of the Toulouse Frailty Platform Population in 2013. J Nutr Health Aging, 19: 570-574
[19] Fukutomi E, Okumiya K, Wada T, Sakamoto R, Ishimoto Y, Kimura Y, et al. (2013). Importance of cognitive assessment as part of the "Kihon Checklist" developed by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare for prediction of frailty at a 2-year follow up. Geriatr Gerontol Int, 13: 654-662
[20] Chen LK, Liu LK, Woo J, Assantachai P, Auyeung TW, Bahyah KS, et al. (2014). Sarcopenia in Asia: consensus report of the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia. J Am Med Dir Assoc, 15: 95-101
[21] Johansen KL, Chertow GM, Jin C, Kutner NG (2007). Significance of frailty among dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol, 18: 2960-2967
[22] Bao Y, Dalrymple L, Chertow GM, Kaysen GA, Johansen KL (2012). Frailty, dialysis initiation, and mortality in end-stage renal disease. Arch Intern Med, 172: 1071-1077
[23] Johansen KL, Delgado C, Bao Y, Kurella Tamura M (2013). Frailty and dialysis initiation. Semin Dial, 26: 690-696
[24] McAdams-DeMarco MA, Law A, Salter ML, Boyarsky B, Gimenez L, Jaar BG, et al. (2013). Frailty as a novel predictor of mortality and hospitalization in individuals of all ages undergoing hemodialysis. J Am Geriatr Soc, 61: 896-901
[25] Johansen KL, Dalrymple LS, Glidden D, Delgado C, Kaysen GA, Grimes B, et al. (2016). Association of Performance-Based and Self-Reported Function-Based Definitions of Frailty with Mortality among Patients Receiving Hemodialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 11: 626-632
[26] Johansen KL (2015). The Frail Dialysis Population: A Growing Burden for the Dialysis Community. Blood Purif, 40: 288-292
[27] Morley JE, Vellas B, van Kan GA, Anker SD, Bauer JM, Bernabei R, et al. (2013). Frailty consensus: a call to action. J Am Med Dir Assoc, 14: 392-397
[28] Fouque D, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Kopple J, Cano N, Chauveau P, Cuppari L, et al. (2008). A proposed nomenclature and diagnostic criteria for protein-energy wasting in acute and chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int, 73: 391-398
[29] Foley RN, Wang C, Ishani A, Collins AJ, Murray AM (2007). Kidney function and sarcopenia in the United States general population: NHANES III. Am J Nephrol, 27: 279-286
[30] Koopman JJ, Rozing MP, Kramer A, de Jager DJ, Ansell D, De Meester JM, et al. (2011). Senescence rates in patients with end-stage renal disease: a critical appraisal of the Gompertz model. Aging Cell, 10: 233-238
[31] Kooman JP, Broers NJ, Usvyat L, Thijssen S, van der Sande FM, Cornelis T, et al. (2013). Out of control: accelerated aging in uremia. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 28: 48-54
[32] Wilhelm-Leen ER, Hall YN, M KT, Chertow GM (2009). Frailty and chronic kidney disease: the Third National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey. Am J Med, 122: 664-671.e662
[33] Collard RM, Boter H, Schoevers RA, Oude Voshaar RC (2012). Prevalence of frailty in community-dwelling older persons: a systematic review. J Am Geriatr Soc, 60: 1487-1492
[34] Goodkin DA, Bragg-Gresham JL, Koenig KG, Wolfe RA, Akiba T, Andreucci VE, et al. (2003). Association of comorbid conditions and mortality in hemodialysis patients in Europe, Japan, and the United States: the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). J Am Soc Nephrol, 14: 3270-3277
[35] Perl J, Karaboyas A, Morgenstern H, Sen A, Rayner HC, Vanholder RC, et al. (2016). Association between changes in quality of life and mortality in hemodialysis patients: results from the DOPPS. Nephrol Dial Transplant
[36] Chang YW, Chen WL, Lin FG, Fang WH, Yen MY, Hsieh CC, et al. (2012). Frailty and its impact on health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study on elder community-dwelling preventive health service users. PLoS One, 7: e38079
[37] Shinaberger CS, Kilpatrick RD, Regidor DL, McAllister CJ, Greenland S, Kopple JD, et al. (2006). Longitudinal associations between dietary protein intake and survival in hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis, 48: 37-49
[38] Segall L, Mardare NG, Ungureanu S, Busuioc M, Nistor I, Enache R, et al. (2009). Nutritional status evaluation and survival in haemodialysis patients in one centre from Romania. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 24: 2536-2540
[39] Dent E, Visvanathan R, Piantadosi C, Chapman I (2012). Use of the Mini Nutritional Assessment to detect frailty in hospitalised older people. J Nutr Health Aging, 16: 764-767
[40] Bollwein J, Volkert D, Diekmann R, Kaiser MJ, Uter W, Vidal K, et al. (2013). Nutritional status according to the mini nutritional assessment (MNA(R)) and frailty in community dwelling older persons: a close relationship. J Nutr Health Aging, 17: 351-356
[41] Dorner TE, Luger E, Tschinderle J, Stein KV, Haider S, Kapan A, et al. (2014). Association between nutritional status (MNA(R)-SF) and frailty (SHARE-FI) in acute hospitalised elderly patients. J Nutr Health Aging, 18: 264-269
[1] Faheemuddin Azher Ahmed. Kidney Disease in Elderly: Importance of Collaboration between Geriatrics and Nephrology[J]. A&D, 2018, 9(4): 745-747.
[2] Emma EF. Kleipool,Emiel O. Hoogendijk,Marijke C. Trappenburg,M. Louis Handoko,Martijn Huisman,Mike JL. Peters,Majon Muller. Frailty in Older Adults with Cardiovascular Disease: Cause, Effect or Both?[J]. A&D, 2018, 9(3): 489-497.
[3] Ilia Stambler. Recognizing Degenerative Aging as a Treatable Medical Condition: Methodology and Policy[J]. A&D, 2017, 8(5): 583-589.
[4] Lucia Tortorella,Giuseppe Vizzielli,Domenico Fusco,William C. Cho,Roberto Bernabei,Giovanni Scambia,Giuseppe Colloca. Ovarian Cancer Management in the Oldest Old: Improving Outcomes and Tailoring Treatments[J]. A&D, 2017, 8(5): 677-684.
[5] Iranzu Mugueta-Aguinaga, Begonya Garcia-Zapirain. Is Technology Present in Frailty? Technology a Back-up Tool for Dealing with Frailty in the Elderly: A Systematic Review[J]. A&D, 2017, 8(2): 176-195.
[6] Hongxia Zhang,Fen Sun,Jixian Wang,Luokun Xie,Chenqi Yang,Mengxiong Pan,Bei Shao,Guo-Yuan Yang,Shao-Hua Yang,Qichuan ZhuGe,Kunlin Jin. Combining Injectable Plasma Scaffold with Mesenchymal Stem/Stromal Cells for Repairing Infarct Cavity after Ischemic Stroke[J]. A&D, 2017, 8(2): 203-214.
[7] Ahmed H Abdelhafiz,Alan J Sinclair. Low HbA1c and Increased Mortality Risk-is Frailty a Confounding Factor?[J]. A&D, 2015, 6(4): 262-270.
[8] Ahmed H Abdelhafiz,Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas,John E. Morley,Alan J Sinclair. Hypoglycemia in Older People - A Less Well Recognized Risk Factor for Frailty[J]. A&D, 2015, 6(2): 156-167.
[9] Alexandra Moura,José Madureira,Pablo Alija,João Carlos Fernandes,José Gerardo Oliveira,Martin Lopez,Madalena Filgueiras,Leonilde Amado,Maria Sameiro-Faria,Vasco Miranda,Alice Santos-Silva,Elísio Costa. Effect of Aging in the Perception of Health-Related Quality of Life in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients under Online-Hemodiafiltration[J]. Aging and Disease, 2015, 6(1): 17-26.
[10] Eduardo Lusa Cadore,Ronei Silveira Pinto,Martim Bottaro,Mikel Izquierdo. Strength and Endurance Training Prescription in Healthy and Frail Elderly[J]. Aging and Disease, 2014, 5(3): 183-195.
[11] Ahmed H Abdelhafiz,Boon Eng Loo,Nicola Hensey,Claire Bailey,Alan Sinclair. The U-shaped Relationship of Traditional Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Adverse Outcomes in Later Life[J]. Aging and Disease, 2012, 3(6): 454-464.
[12] Periklis Dousdampanis,Konstantina Trigka,Costas Fourtounas. Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease in the Elderly: a Field of Ongoing Debate[J]. Aging and Disease, 2012, 3(5): 360-372.
[13] Kristin A. Lowry,Abbe N. Vallejo,Stephanie A. Studenski. Successful Aging as a Continuum of Functional Independence: Lessons from Physical Disability Models of Aging[J]. Aging and Disease, 2012, 3(1): 5-15.
[14] Huifen Li,Bhavish Manwani,Sean X. Leng. Frailty, Inflammation, and Immunity[J]. Aging and Disease, 2011, 2(6): 466-473.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
Copyright © 2014 Aging and Disease, All Rights Reserved.
Address: Aging and Disease Editorial Office 3400 Camp Bowie Boulevard Fort Worth, TX76106 USA
Fax: (817) 735-0408 E-mail: editorial@aginganddisease.org
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd