Skip to main content
Log in

Tilburg frailty indicator

German translation and psychometric testing

Tilburg Frailty Indicator

Eine deutsche Übersetzung und psychometrische Testung

  • Originalien
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The Tilburg frailty indicator (TFI) is a self-report measurement instrument which integrates the physical, psychological and social domains to assess frailty in older adults. The aim of this study was the adaptation of the TFI to a German version and testing of the psychometric properties.

Material and methods

This study surveyed 210 individuals aged 64–91 years living at home. The mean age of participants was M = 75.3±5.7 years with 62 % females. The internal consistency was tested with Cronbach’s alpha. The test-retest reliability was calculated after 20 weeks. The German TFI was validated using alternative measures for assessment of the quality of life, e.g. Eurohis-QoL-8 and short form health survey (SF-12), the patient health questionnaire (PHQ), the geriatric anxiety inventory short form (GAI-SF), the social support scale (F-Soz-U-K-14) and the resilience scale (RS-11).

Results

The internal consistency was acceptable with a value for Cronbach’s alpha of 0.67. The test-retest reliability was good after 5 months α = 0.87 (physical domain r = 0.85, psychological domain r = 0.75 and social domain r = 0.84). The inter-item correlations ranged between − 0.06 and 0.57. Correlations with alternative frailty measures showed good convergent and divergent validity.

Conclusion

This study showed acceptable psychometric properties of the German adaptation of the TFI which was found to be age and frailty sensitive. The results of the validity of the TFI support the three domains integrated in the frailty score. Further application and testing of the German TFI in primary care and clinical settings are suggested to consolidate the findings.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Der Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) ist ein Selbstbeurteilungsinstrument, das die physischen, psychischen und sozialen Bereiche für das Assessment von Gebrechlichkeit bei älteren Erwachsenen integriert. Ziele dieser Studie sind die Anpassung des TFI auf eine deutsche Version und ein Test der psychometrischen Eigenschaften.

Methoden

Befragt wurden 210 selbstständig lebende Personen im Alter von 64 bis 91 Jahren. Das durchschnittliche Alter der Teilnehmer war M(SD) = 75,3 (5,7) Jahren, der Frauenanteil bei 62 %. Die interne Konsistenz wurde anhand von Cronbach’s α getestet. Die Retest-Reliabilität wurde nach 20 Wochen berechnet. Validiert wurde die deutsche Version des TFI mit alternativen Instrumenten zum Assessment von Lebensqualität (EUROHIS-QoL-8, SF-12), Depression und Angst (PHQ, GAI-SF), sozialer Unterstützung (F-Soz-U-K-14) und Resilienz (RS-11).

Ergebnisse

Die interne Konsistenz war mit Cronbach’s α = 0,67 akzeptabel. Die Retest-Reliabilität nach 5 Monaten erwies sich als gut α = 0,87 (r = 0,85, r= 0,75, r= 0,84 für den physischen, psychischen bzw. sozialen Bereich). Die Inter-Item-Korrelationen lagen zwischen − 0,06 und 0,57. Korrelationen mit alternativen Maßen der Gebrechlichkeit ergaben eine gute konvergente und divergente Validität.

Schlussfolgerungen

Die Studie wies akzeptable psychometrische Eigenschaften der deutschen Adaptation des TFI nach. Der TFI war sensitiv bezüglich Alter und Gebrechlichkeit, und die Ergebnisse der Validitätstestung stützen die 3 in den TFI integrierten Bereiche. Empfohlen wird eine weitere Anwendung und Erprobung der deutschen Version des TFI in der medizinischen Grundversorgung und in klinischen Studien, um die Ergebnisse zu konsolidieren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andreasen J, Sorensen EE, Gobbens RJ et al (2014) Danish version of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator–translation, cross-cultural adaption and validity pretest by cognitive interviewing. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 59:32–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Angermeyer MC, Kilian R, Matschinger H (2000) WHOQOL-100 und WHOQOL-BREF. Handbuch für die deutschsprachigen Versionen der WHO Instrumente zur Erfassung von Lebensqualität. Hogrefe, Göttingen

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bergman H, Ferrucci L, Guralnik J et al (2007) Frailty: an emerging research and clinical paradigm-issues and controversies. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 62:731–737

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brislin RW (1970) Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross-Cult Psychol 1:185–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Byrne GJ, Pachana NA (2011) Development and validation of a short form of the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory—the GAI-SF. Int Psychogeriatr 23:125–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cheak-Zamora NC, Wyrwich KW, McBride TD (2009) Reliability and validity of the SF-12v2 in the medical expenditure panel survey. Qual Life Res 18:727–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cortina JM (1993) What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol 78:98–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dapp U, Fertmann R, Anders J et al (2011) Die Longitudinal-Urban-Cohort-Ageing-Studie (LUCAS). Z Gerontol Geriat 44:55–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fydrich T, Sommer G, Tydecks S et al (2009) Fragebogen zur sozialen Unterstützung (F-SozU): Normierung der Kurzform (K-14). Z Med Psychol 18:43–48

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gobbens RJ, Van Assen MA (2012) Frailty and its prediction of disability and health care utilization: the added value of interviews and physical measures following a self-report questionnaire. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 55:369–379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gobbens RJ, Luijkx KG, Wijnen-Sponselee MT et al (2010) Toward a conceptual definition of frail community dwelling older people. Nurs Outlook 58:76–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gobbens RJ, Luijkx KG, Wijnen-Sponselee MT et al (2010) Towards an integral conceptual model of frailty. J Nutr Health Aging 14:175–181

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gobbens RJ, Van Assen MA, Luijkx KG et al (2012) The predictive validity of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator: disability, health care utilization, and quality of life in a population at risk. Gerontologist 52:619–631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gobbens RJ, Van Assen MA, Luijkx KG et al (201 2) Testing an integral conceptual model of frailty. J Adv Nurs 68:2047–2060

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gobbens RJ, Van Assen MA, Luijkx KG et al (2010) The Tilburg Frailty Indicator: psychometric properties. J Am Med Dir Assoc 11:344–355

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Graefe K, Zipfel S, Herzog W et al (2004) Screening psychischer Störungen mit dem “Gesundheitsfragebogen für Patienten (PHQ-D)”. Ergebnisse der deutschen Validierungsstudie. Diagnostica 50:171–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW et al (2010) The Patient Health Questionnaire somatic, anxiety, and depressive symptom scales: a systematic review. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 32:345–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Loewe B, Kroenke K, Herzog W et al (2004) Measuring depression outcome with a brief self-report instrument: sensitivity to change of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). J Affect Disord 81:61–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Metzelthin SF, Daniels R, Van Rossum E et al (2010) The psychometric properties of three self-report screening instruments for identifying frail older people in the community. BMC Public Health 10:176

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pialoux T, Goyard J, Lesourd B (2012) Screening tools for frailty in primary health care: a systematic review. Geriatr Gerontol Int 12:189–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Santiago LM, Luz LL, Mattos IE et al (2012) [Cross-cultural adaptation of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) for use in the Brazilian population]. Cad Saude Publica 28:1795–1801

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Santiago LM, Luz LL, Mattos IE et al (2013) Psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Tilburg frailty indicator (TFI). Arch Gerontol Geriatr 57:39–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schmidt S, Mühlan H, Power M (2006) The EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index: psychometric results of a cross-cultural field study. Eur J Public Health 16:420–428

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schumacher J, Leppert K, Gunzelmann T et al (2005) Die Resilienzskala—Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung der psychischen Widerstandsfähigkeit als Personmerkmal. Z Klin Psychol Psychiatr Psychother 53:16–39

    Google Scholar 

  25. Uchmanowicz I, Jankowska-Polańska B, Łoboz-Rudnicka M et al (2014) Cross-cultural adaptation and reliability testing of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator for optimizing care of Polish patients with frailty syndrome. Clin Interv Aging 9:997–1001

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ware JE, Gandek B, Aaronson N et al (1997) Testing the SF-12 summary health measures in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. Qual Life Res 6:417

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey—construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34:220–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research study was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research Germany with the funding number (01ET100 2B).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Freitag Ph.D..

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

S. Freitag, S. Schmidt and R.J.J. Gobbens declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

All persons recruited in this study signed an informed consent and data were treated anonymously. Ethical approval was given by the medical chamber of Hamburg, the ethics committee of the University of Greifswald and in accordance with national law and the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (in its current revised form).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Freitag, S., Schmidt, S. & Gobbens, R. Tilburg frailty indicator. Z Gerontol Geriat 49, 86–93 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-015-0889-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-015-0889-9

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation