Frailty prevalence and efficient screening in primary care-based memory clinics

Background Little is known about the prevalence of frailty among patients with memory concerns attending a primary care-based memory clinic. Objective This study aims to describe the prevalence of frailty among patients attending a primary care-based memory clinic and to determine if prevalence rates differ based on the screening tool that is used. Methods We conducted a retrospective medical record review for all consecutive patients assessed in a primary care-based memory clinic over 8 months. Frailty was measured in 258 patients using the Fried frailty criteria, which relies on physical measures, and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), which relies on functional status. Weighted kappa statistics were calculated to compare the Fried frailty and the CFS. Results The prevalence of frailty was 16% by Fried criteria and 48% by the CFS. Agreement between Fried frailty and CFS was fair for CFS 5+ (kappa = 0.22; 95% confidence interval: 0.13, 0.32) and moderate for CFS 6+ (kappa = 0.47; 0.34, 0.61). Dual-trait measures of hand grip strength with gait speed were found to be a valid proxy for Fried frailty phenotype. Conclusions Among primary care patients with memory concerns, frailty prevalence rates differed based on the measure used. Screening for frailty in this population using measures relying on physical performance may be a more efficient approach for persons already at risk of further health instability from cognitive impairment. Our findings demonstrate how measure selection should be based on the objectives and context in which frailty screening occurs. Lay Summary There is some evidence that frailty and dementia are inter-related. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of frailty among patients attending a primary care-based memory clinic using 2 commonly used frailty measures: the Fried frailty phenotype criteria and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Frailty prevalence in patients with memory concerns is at least double that of regular primary care practice; prevalence is 16% when the Fried frailty phenotype is used, which incorporates physical frailty measures, as compared with prevalence of 48% when the more function-based measure of CFS is used. Screening tools should be selected considering the objectives and context in which they are used. Within primary care-based memory clinics, physical frailty measures may be most optimal. Using hand grip and gait speed screening as a valid proxy for Fried frailty phenotype offers a feasible and practical way of identifying frailty relating more to physical underlying conditions. Based on our study findings, frailty screening within primary care-based memory clinics is justified for patients 65 years+; early identification and intervention may prevent further decline and adverse outcomes. Further research in this area will increase our understanding of frailty and dementia in this context and how to best plan care.