Abstract
BACKGROUND It is unclear whether frailty index (FI) change captures mortality risk better than and independently of the current FI level, i.e. whether a regular FI assessment among older adults provides additional insights for mortality risk stratification or not.
METHODS We used data from the LASA 75-PLUS-study, which monitored health among 508 older adults (75+) between 2016-2019 every 9 months. Joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data were used to assess the impact of both current FI and within-person FI change during the last year on mortality risk.
RESULTS 20% of the participants died during 4.5 years of follow-up. Adding within-person FI change to the current FI model improved model fit and it showed that FI increases during the last year were associated with a strong increase in mortality risk. Consequently, the effect of the current FI decreased considerably and became statistically non-significant.
CONCLUSIONS The rate of FI change was more important than the current FI level for short-term mortality prediction among the oldest old, which highlights the benefits of regular frailty assessments.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam is supported by a grant from the Netherlands Ministry of Health Welfare and Sports, Directorate of Long-Term Care
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The LASA study is conducted in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and received approval by the medical ethics committee of the VU University Medical Center (IRB numbers: 92/138, 2002/141, 2012/361, and 2016.301).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) are available for use for specific research questions, provided that an agreement is made up. Research proposals should be submitted to the LASA Steering Group, using a standard analysis proposal form that can be obtained from the LASA website: www.lasa-vu.nl. Files with data published in this publication are freely available for replication purposes and can be obtained using the same analysis proposal form. The LASA Steering Group will review all requests for data to ensure that proposals for the use of LASA data do not violate privacy regulations and are in keeping with informed consent that is provided by all LASA participants. The R-Markdown code reproducing all analyses, results and this manuscript are available online (https://osf.io/8njg9/).
