Repository logo
 
Publication

Validation of the Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) in French Language

2019Journal article Open access
Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorAbraham, P
dc.contributor.authorCourvoisier, DS
dc.contributor.authorAnnweiler, C
dc.contributor.authorLenoir, C
dc.contributor.authorMillien, T
dc.contributor.authorDalmaz, F
dc.contributor.authorFlaatten, H
dc.contributor.authorMoreno, R
dc.contributor.authorChristensen, S
dc.contributor.authorde Lange, DW
dc.contributor.authorGuidet, B
dc.contributor.authorBendjelid, K
dc.contributor.authorWalder, B
dc.contributor.authorBollen Pinto, B
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-14T15:05:50Z
dc.date.available2020-08-14T15:05:50Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractBackground: Very old critical ill patients are a rapid expanding group. To better understand the magnitude of the challenges involved in intensive care practice for an ageing population and discuss a rational allocation of resources, healthcare practitioners need a reliable evaluation of frailty. In order to promote the adequate use of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in a wider panel of countries, we aimed to develop, validate and characterise a French (FR) version from the original English (EN) CFS. Methods: We included participants recruited prospectively for the observational "The very old intensive care patient: A multinational prospective observation study" (VIP Study) at Geneva University Hospitals (FR speaking hospital). A FR version of the CFS was obtained by translation (EN- > FR) and back translation (FR- > EN). The final CFS-FR was then evaluated twice on the same participants with at least a 2-week interval by FR-speaking doctors and nurses. Results: Inter-rater reliability was 0.87 (95%CI: 0.76-0.93) between doctors for the original CFS version and 0.76 (95%CI: 0.57-0.87) between nurses for the FR version. Inter-rater variability between doctor and nurse was 0.75 (95%CI: 0.56-0.87) for the original version, and 0.73 (95%CI: 0.52-0.85) for the FR version. Test-retest (stability) with the original vs the FR version was 0.86 (95%CI: 0.72-0.93) for doctors and 0.87 (95%CI: 0.76-0.93) for nurses. Differences between the evaluations of the CFS-EN and CSF-FR were not different from 0, with a mean difference of 0.06 (95%CI -0.24, 0.36) for the EN version and - 0.03 (95%CI -0.47, 0.41) for the FR version. Average original version ratings were slightly lower than FR version ratings, though this difference did not reach significance: -0.29 (95%CI -0.54, 0.04). Conclusion: In this prospective cohort of very old intensive care participants we developed and tested the basic psychometric properties (internal consistency, reproducibility) of a French version of the CFS. This manuscript provides clinically meaningful psychometric properties that have not been previously reported in any other language, including in the original EN version. The French cultural adaptation of this CFS has adequate psychometric properties for doctors or nurses to evaluate frailty in very old intensive care patients.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.citationBMC Geriatr. 2019 Nov 21;19(1):322.pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12877-019-1315-8pt_PT
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/3504
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.subjectAgedpt_PT
dc.subjectCohort Studiespt_PT
dc.subjectCritical Carept_PT
dc.subjectFemalept_PT
dc.subjectFrailtypt_PT
dc.subjectHumanspt_PT
dc.subjectMalept_PT
dc.subjectMiddle Agedpt_PT
dc.subjectPsychometricspt_PT
dc.subjectReproducibility of Resultspt_PT
dc.subjectTranslationspt_PT
dc.subjectLanguagept_PT
dc.subjectHSJ UCIpt_PT
dc.titleValidation of the Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) in French Languagept_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.issue1pt_PT
oaire.citation.startPage322pt_PT
oaire.citation.titleBMC Geriatricspt_PT
oaire.citation.volume19pt_PT
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
BMC Geriatr 2019.pdf
Size:
1.07 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

UCI - Artigos