Validation of the French version of the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13).
EVA-13
Frailty
French version
Functional decline
Mortality
VES-13
Vulnerability
Vulnerable elders survey-13
Journal
BMC medical research methodology
ISSN: 1471-2288
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Res Methodol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968545
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 02 2020
05 02 2020
Historique:
received:
15
04
2019
accepted:
23
01
2020
entrez:
7
2
2020
pubmed:
7
2
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Identifying and assessing degree and type of frailty among older persons is a major challenge when targeting high risk populations to identify preventive interventions. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-(VES-13) is a simple instrument to identify frailty defined as risk for death, functional decline or institutionalization. Translate VES-13 into French and validate it. The French version of VES-13 was developed by forward-backward translation of the VES-13 survey instrument. The authors assessed its feasibility, construct validity, and ability to predict the combined outcomes of admission to institution or death at 18 months, in 135 persons over 70 years of age living in the community. Subjects were recruited from three settings: Group 1 - a health prevention center (n = 45); Group 2 - an ambulatory care geriatric clinic (n = 40); and Group 3 - an intermediate care hospital unit (n = 50). The combined outcomes data were recorded by telephone interview with participants or a proxy. Feasibility of the French version, named Echelle de Vulnérabilité des Ainés-13 or EVA-13, was excellent. The scale classified 5 (11%) persons as vulnerable (score of 3 or more) in Group 1, 23 (58%) in Group 2 and 45 (90%) in Group 3 (p < 0.001) with scores of 0.91 +/- 1.16, 4.27 +/- 3.17 and 6.90 +/- 3.17, respectively (p < 0.001). At follow-up, among the 60 non-vulnerable subjects, 58 (96%) were alive and living at home, whereas 46 (65%) of the 70 vulnerable subjects were alive and living at home (p < 0.001). EVA-13 was determined to be valid and reliable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Identifying and assessing degree and type of frailty among older persons is a major challenge when targeting high risk populations to identify preventive interventions. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-(VES-13) is a simple instrument to identify frailty defined as risk for death, functional decline or institutionalization.
OBJECTIVE
Translate VES-13 into French and validate it.
METHODS
The French version of VES-13 was developed by forward-backward translation of the VES-13 survey instrument. The authors assessed its feasibility, construct validity, and ability to predict the combined outcomes of admission to institution or death at 18 months, in 135 persons over 70 years of age living in the community. Subjects were recruited from three settings: Group 1 - a health prevention center (n = 45); Group 2 - an ambulatory care geriatric clinic (n = 40); and Group 3 - an intermediate care hospital unit (n = 50). The combined outcomes data were recorded by telephone interview with participants or a proxy.
RESULTS
Feasibility of the French version, named Echelle de Vulnérabilité des Ainés-13 or EVA-13, was excellent. The scale classified 5 (11%) persons as vulnerable (score of 3 or more) in Group 1, 23 (58%) in Group 2 and 45 (90%) in Group 3 (p < 0.001) with scores of 0.91 +/- 1.16, 4.27 +/- 3.17 and 6.90 +/- 3.17, respectively (p < 0.001). At follow-up, among the 60 non-vulnerable subjects, 58 (96%) were alive and living at home, whereas 46 (65%) of the 70 vulnerable subjects were alive and living at home (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
EVA-13 was determined to be valid and reliable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32024470
doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-0910-x
pii: 10.1186/s12874-020-0910-x
pmc: PMC7003319
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
21Références
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep;97(39):e12298
pubmed: 30278504
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Jun;54(6):991-1001
pubmed: 16776798
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011 Aug;59(8):1471-6
pubmed: 21718276
Cancer. 2016 Aug 15;122(16):2579-86
pubmed: 27348765
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001 Dec;49(12):1691-9
pubmed: 11844005
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013 Jun;14(6):392-7
pubmed: 23764209
BMC Geriatr. 2017 Mar 20;17(1):69
pubmed: 28320329
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Oct;56(10):1932-6
pubmed: 18775036
CMAJ. 2018 Sep 24;190(38):E1134-E1140
pubmed: 30249759
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016 Feb;80(2):195-203
pubmed: 26595712
J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2018 Jan/Mar;41(1):42-48
pubmed: 27341327
Lancet. 2013 Mar 2;381(9868):752-62
pubmed: 23395245
Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2018 Jan;74:32-38
pubmed: 28957686
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009 Nov;57(11):2070-6
pubmed: 19793154
CMAJ. 2005 Aug 30;173(5):489-95
pubmed: 16129869
Ann Oncol. 2015 Feb;26(2):288-300
pubmed: 24936581
Am J Med. 2005 Nov;118(11):1225-31
pubmed: 16271906
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009 Mar;57(3):492-8
pubmed: 19245414
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 Mar;60(3):447-54
pubmed: 22409735
Ageing Res Rev. 2011 Jan;10(1):104-14
pubmed: 20850567
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001 Mar;56(3):M146-56
pubmed: 11253156
Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Sep;39(19):1897-1908
pubmed: 27558741
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 May;56(5):898-903
pubmed: 18363679
Clin Geriatr Med. 2018 Feb;34(1):25-38
pubmed: 29129215