Scholarlink

Purpose of Review <p>Our scoping review maps interventions for robust, pre-frail and frail older adults, asking whether protocol features, programme duration and assessment tools differ across frailty levels.</p> Recent Findings <p>Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome—fatigue, weight loss, low reserve, cognitive and social vulnerability—linked to higher hospitalisation, falls, disability and death. Prevalence rises steeply with age, burdening health systems worldwide. Although robust and pre-frail stages are the ideal prevention window, well-designed programmes delivered to frail elders can still slow decline. In the past decade, dozens of trials have tested exercise-centred or multicomponent interventions that pair physical training with nutrition, education or cognitive stimulation. Reviews report meaningful gains in gait speed and strength but synthesise pooled older-adult samples without stratifying content or outcomes by baseline frailty. Whether current protocols suit each frailty stage therefore remains unknown.</p> Summary <p>Using Joanna Briggs and PRISMA-ScR guidance we searched eight databases and grey literature (2018–2023). Of 3 416 records, 57 studies met inclusion. Interventions clustered around exercise (22) and multicomponent regimes (20); others targeted nutrition (4), health education (4), cognitive training (3), care plans (2) or artistic activities (2). Samples ranged from exclusively robust (2) or pre-frail (8) to fully mixed robust–pre-frail–frail groups (18). Fourteen screening tools were used, most often the Fried Phenotype (19). Community-dwelling elders predominated (54 studies) and 25 interventions lasted ≤ 3&#xa0;months. Overall, frailty research <b>applies</b> largely uniform interventions across heterogeneous populations while relying on highly varied assessment tools. Standardising measurement and developing level-specific protocols remain essential steps toward personalised frailty care.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Interventions for Older Adults Across Frailty Levels: A Scoping Review

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月4日

查看全文
  • Luana K. Ferreira,
  • Mariana Porto,
  • Elisabeth Fernandes,
  • Andressa Sobrinho,
  • Letícia Fernanda Belo,
  • Layana Liss Schwenger,
  • Grace Gomes

摘要

Purpose of Review

Our scoping review maps interventions for robust, pre-frail and frail older adults, asking whether protocol features, programme duration and assessment tools differ across frailty levels.

Recent Findings

Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome—fatigue, weight loss, low reserve, cognitive and social vulnerability—linked to higher hospitalisation, falls, disability and death. Prevalence rises steeply with age, burdening health systems worldwide. Although robust and pre-frail stages are the ideal prevention window, well-designed programmes delivered to frail elders can still slow decline. In the past decade, dozens of trials have tested exercise-centred or multicomponent interventions that pair physical training with nutrition, education or cognitive stimulation. Reviews report meaningful gains in gait speed and strength but synthesise pooled older-adult samples without stratifying content or outcomes by baseline frailty. Whether current protocols suit each frailty stage therefore remains unknown.

Summary

Using Joanna Briggs and PRISMA-ScR guidance we searched eight databases and grey literature (2018–2023). Of 3 416 records, 57 studies met inclusion. Interventions clustered around exercise (22) and multicomponent regimes (20); others targeted nutrition (4), health education (4), cognitive training (3), care plans (2) or artistic activities (2). Samples ranged from exclusively robust (2) or pre-frail (8) to fully mixed robust–pre-frail–frail groups (18). Fourteen screening tools were used, most often the Fried Phenotype (19). Community-dwelling elders predominated (54 studies) and 25 interventions lasted ≤ 3 months. Overall, frailty research applies largely uniform interventions across heterogeneous populations while relying on highly varied assessment tools. Standardising measurement and developing level-specific protocols remain essential steps toward personalised frailty care.