Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 9, 2026

Measuring Frailty in HIV-infected Individuals. Identification of Frail Patients is the First Step to Amelioration and Reversal of Frailty
Published on: July 24, 2013
Performance of Edmonton Frail Scale on frailty assessment: its association with multi-dimensional geriatric
Simone Perna1, Matthew D'Arcy Francis2, Chiara Bologna3
1Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, Section of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Pavia, Azienda di Servizi alla Persona di Pavia, Via Emilia 12, Pavia, Italy. simoneperna@hotmail.it.
Background:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) on frailty assessment in association with multi-dimensional conditions assessed with specific screening tools and to explore the prevalence of frailty by gender.
Methods:
We enrolled 366 hospitalised patients (women\men: 251\115), mean age 81.5 years. The EFS was given to the patients to evaluate their frailty. Then we collected data concerning cognitive status through Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), health status (evaluated with the number of diseases), functional independence (Barthel Index and Activities Daily Living; BI, ADL, IADL), use of drugs (counting of drugs taken every day), Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Skeletal Muscle Index of sarcopenia (SMI), osteoporosis and functionality (Handgrip strength).
Results:
According with the EFS, the 19.7% of subjects were classified as non frail, 66.4% as apparently vulnerable and 13.9% with severe frailty. The EFS scores were associated with cognition (MMSE: β = 0.980; p < 0.01), functional independence (ADL: β = -0.512; p < 0.00); (IADL: β = -0.338; p < 0.01); use of medications (β = 0.110; p < 0.01); nutrition (MNA: β = -0.413; p < 0.01); mood (GDS: β = -0.324; p < 0.01); functional performance (Handgrip: β = -0.114, p < 0.01) (BI: β = -0.037; p < 0.01), but not with number of comorbidities (β = 0.108; p = 0.052). In osteoporotic patients versus not-osteoporotic patients the mean EFS score did not differ between groups (women: p = 0.365; men: p = 0.088), whereas in Sarcopenic versus not-Sarcopenic patients, there was a significant differences in women: p < 0.05.
Conclusions:
This study suggests that measuring frailty with EFS is helpful and performance tool for stratifying the state of fragility in a group of institutionalized elderly. As matter of facts the EFS has been shown to be associated with several geriatric conditions such independence, drugs assumption, mood, mental, functional and nutritional status.
Related Concept Videos
Drug Dosing in Renal Diseases: Estimation of Glomerular Filtration Rate Based on Serum Creatinine Concentration
Pharmacokinetics in Geriatric Patients: Effect of Age on Drug Excretion

