Search

To assess the internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, and concurrent validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) within community-dwelling older people in Spain, Greece, Croatia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Cross-sectional study. Primary care and community settings. In total, 2250 community-dwelling older people (60.3% women; mean age = 79.7 years; standard deviation = 5.7). We assessed the reliability and validity of the full TFI as well as its physical, psychological, and social domains. Baseline data of the Urban Health Centers Europe project were used. The internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha. The convergent and divergent validity were assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients between the domains and alternative measures: the 12-item short-form, Groningen activity restriction scale, 5-item mental well-being scale of the 36-Item Short Form Survey, and the De Jong Gierveld loneliness scale. The concurrent validity was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve with physically frail (Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe-Frailty Instrument), loss of independence (Groningen activity restriction scale), limited function (Global Activity Limitation Index), poor mental health (5-item mental well-being scale of the 36-Item Short Form Survey), and feeling lonely (De Jong Gierveld loneliness scale) as criteria. The internal consistency of the full TFI was satisfactory with the Cronbach alpha ≥0.70 in the total population and in each country. The internal consistency of the psychological and social domains was not satisfactory. The convergent and divergent validity of the physical, psychological, and social domains was supported by all the alternative measures in the total population and in each country. The concurrent validity of the full TFI and the physical, psychological, and social domains was supported with most area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ≥0.70 in the total population and in each country. The TFI is a reliable and valid instrument to assess frailty in community-dwelling older people in Spain, Greece, Croatia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To explore the extent to which client characteristics, decision-maker attributes, and country influence judgments of institutional long-term care (ILTC) appropriateness for people with dementia. Design, setting, and participants A total of 161 experts in dementia care from 8 European countries reviewed a series of 14 vignettes representing people with dementia on the cusp of ILTC admission and indicated the most appropriate setting in which to support each case in a simple discrete choice exercise: own home, very sheltered housing, residential home, or nursing home. At least 16 experts participated in each country (Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). Measurements Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the experts and their placement preferences. Logistic regression modeling was used to explore the extent to which the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of people with dementia, and the profession, workplace, and country of decision-makers were associated with ILTC recommendation. Results Client characteristics, decision-maker attributes, and country all seemed to play a part in influencing professionals' perceptions of the appropriateness of ILTC for people with dementia. Expert decision-makers were more likely to recommend ILTC for individuals who required help with mobility or had multiple care needs, and appeared to give more weight to carers' than clients’ wishes. Community-based social workers were less likely than other professional groups to favor ILTC placement. Experts in Finland, Germany, and the United Kingdom were less likely to recommend ILTC than experts in France, the Netherlands, and Estonia; experts in Sweden and Spain took an intermediate position. Conclusion This study provides new understanding of the factors that shape professionals' perceptions of ILTC appropriateness and highlights the need to construct multifaceted models of institutionalization when planning services for people with dementia. It also has several important clinical implications (including flagging interventions that could decrease the need for ILTC), and provides a basis for enhancing professionals’ decision-making capabilities (including the greater involvement of clients themselves). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]