Objective and subjective rapid frailty screening tools in people with HIV. Issue 2 (5th November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Beanland, A; Alagaratnam, J; Goffe, C; Bailey, A; Dosekun, O; Petersen, C; Ayap, W; Garvey, LJ; Walsh, J; Mackie, NE; Winston, A
• Is Part Of: HIV medicine. Volume 22:Issue 2(2021)
• Page Start: 146
• Page End: 150
• Publication Date: 2020-11-05
• Subjects: ageing -- clinical -- frailty -- human immunodeficiency virus -- screening; HIV infections -- Treatment -- Periodicals; HIV-positive persons -- Periodicals; HIV infections -- Treatment -- Decision making -- Periodicals; 616.9792
• DOI: 10.1111/hiv.12988
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1464-2662

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: As people with HIV (PWH) age, the prevalence of frailty increases. Rapid screening tests to identify frailty within HIV outpatient settings are required to identify at‐risk individuals. We undertook a service evaluation to assess three short frailty assessments in PWH. Methods: We assessed two objective [gait speed (GS), timed‐up‐and‐go test (TUGT)] and one subjective [the self‐reported health questionnaire (SRH)] frailty screening tools in PWH aged > 40 years attending a single HIV outpatient department. Factors associated with positive frailty screening tests (defined as GS < 0.8 m/s, TUGT ≥ 10 s and SRH score < 6) were assessed using logistic regression models. Ethical considerations: This was a service evaluation and was approved as a service evaluation by the Imperial College Healthcare NHS trust HIV clinical research committee (February 2020). All participants were given verbal information and were able to terminate the screening tests at any time. Results: Of 84 PWH approached, 80 individuals completed all screening tests (median age = 56 years, range: 40–80) with a positive frailty screening prevalence in 19%, 33% and 20% for GS, TUGT and SRH, respectively. All tests were considered acceptable to participants. Factors statistically significantly associated with frailty included age (GS and TUGT), detectable HIV RNA (TUGT), number of comorbidities (GS and TUGT), presence of polypharmacy (GS and TUGT) and total number of concomitant medication (GS and SRH). Conclusions: Rates of positive screening tests for frailty are dependent on screening tool used, with all three tools being acceptable to participants. Objective measures of frailty screening (GS and TUGT) are more closely associated with clinical parameters than is a subjective measure of frailty screening (SRH).