- Title
- Practitioner perceptions of the feasibility of common frailty screening instruments within general practice settings: a mixed methods study
- Creator
- Ambagtsheer, Rachel; Casey, Mavourneen; Lawless, Michael; Archibald, Mandy; Yu, Solomon; Kitson, Alison; Beilby, Justin
- Date
- 2022
- Type
- Text; Journal article
- Identifier
- http://researchonline.federation.edu.au/vital/access/HandleResolver/1959.17/192485
- Identifier
- vital:17986
- Identifier
-
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-022-01778-9
- Identifier
- ISSN:2731-4553 (ISSN)
- Abstract
- Background: Frailty is a highly prevalent clinical syndrome increasing older people’s vulnerability to risk of adverse outcomes. Better frailty identification through expanded screening implementation has been advocated within general practice settings, both internationally and within Australia. However, little is known about practitioner perceptions of the feasibility of specific instruments, and the underlying motivations behind those perceptions. Consequently, the purpose of this study was to explore the attitudes and perceptions of a convenience and volunteer sample of Australian general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) towards common frailty screening instruments. Methods: The feasibility of several frailty screening instruments (PRISMA-7 [P7], Edmonton Frail Scale [EFS], FRAIL Questionnaire [FQ], Gait Speed Test [GST], Groningen Frailty Indicator [GFI], Kihon Checklist [KC] and Timed Up and Go [TUG]) to 43 Australian GPs and PNs was assessed. The study adopted a concurrent embedded mixed-methods design incorporating quantitative (ranking exercise) and qualitative (content analysis) data collection integrated during the analysis phase. Results: Practitioners assessed multi-dimensional instruments (EFS, GFI, KC) as having relatively higher clinical utility, better integration into existing assessment processes and stronger links to intervention over uni-dimensional (GST, TUG) and simple (FQ, P7) instruments. Conclusions: While existing frailty screening instruments show promise as an initial step in supporting better care for older people, all the included instruments were associated with perceived advantages and disadvantages. Ultimately, clinicians will need to weigh several factors in their selection of the optimal screening instrument. Further translational research, with a focus on contextual fit, is needed to support clinical decision-making on the selection of instruments for frailty screening. © 2022, The Author(s).
- Publisher
- BioMed Central Ltd
- Relation
- BMC Primary Care Vol. 23, no. 1 (2022), p.
- Rights
- All metadata describing materials held in, or linked to, the repository is freely available under a CC0 licence
- Rights
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Rights
- Copyright © 2022, The Author(s)
- Rights
- Open Access
- Subject
- 4203 Health services and systems; 4206 Public health; 80 and over; Aged; Community health nursing; Frailty; General practice; Mass screening; Primary care
- Full Text
- Reviewed
- Funder
- This work was supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) via funding provided for the Centre of Research Excellence in Frailty and Healthy Ageing (#1102208), a Torrens University Australia Seed Grant, and a GTRAC-Resthaven Research grant. MA acknowledges the fellowship support received from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
- Hits: 447
- Visitors: 473
- Downloads: 29
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | SOURCE1 | Published version | 985 KB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |