Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 19, 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
Provider miscategorization of frailty in an outpatient urogynecologic population
Julia K Shinnick1,2, Christina A Raker3, Vivian Sung4
1Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA. JShinnick@wihri.org.
Introduction And Hypothesis:
Routine assessment of frailty preoperatively is recommended for older adults, because frailty is associated with adverse surgical outcomes. This study was aimed at describing the percentage of patients whose frailty status was correctly categorized by Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPRMS) providers and to determine patient predictors of accurate categorization.
Methods:
Cross-sectional study was carried out of English speaking, new patients, >65 years old, presenting from March to June 2018. Providers categorized patients as frail, pre-frail, or not frail based on clinical impression. Frailty was defined using the Fried Frailty Assessment (FFA), a validated, objective measure including weight loss, exhaustion, physical activity, walk speed, and grip strength. Provider categorizations were compared with FFA results. Multiple logistic regression was used to estimate patient predictors of frailty categorization. Data from other fields that approximated a 45% proportion of miscategorization guided sample size estimates.
Results:
Ten FPMRS providers participated, and 106 out of 110 patients (96%) had complete data. Primary diagnoses were pelvic organ prolapse (37%), incontinence (20%), and overactive bladder (17%). On FFA, 16 (15%) patients were frail, 50 (47%) were pre-frail, and 40 (38%) were not frail. The overall proportion of miscategorization was 58% (95% confidence interval 49-68%). Providers correctly categorized 50% of frail patients, 34% of pre-frail patients, and 48% of non-frail patients. Slow walk time was associated with provider categorization of frailty, regardless of frailty status (p = 0.01).
Conclusions:
Clinical impression may not adequately assess frailty. Miscategorization of frailty by FPMRS providers was higher than in other fields.
Related Concept Videos
05:53Measuring Frailty in HIV-infected Individuals. Identification of Frail Patients is the First Step to Amelioration and Reversal of Frailty
06:58Frailty Assessment in an Aging Mouse Model
04:00Identifying Frailty Using Point-of-Care Ultrasonography: Image Acquisition and Assessment
09:37Application of Lucilia sericata Larvae in Debridement of Pressure Wounds in Outpatient Settings
07:27Exergaming in Older People Living with HIV Improves Balance, Mobility and Ameliorates Some Aspects of Frailty
14:49Conducting Respiratory Oscillometry in an Outpatient Setting

