Validation of the French version of the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13)

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 d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BMC medical research methodology Vol. 20; no. 1; pp. 21 - 6
Main Authors: Belmin, Joël, Khellaf, Lyamna, Pariel, Sylvie, Jarzebowski, Witold, Valembois, Lucie, Zeisel, John, Lafuente-Lafuente, Carmelo
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: London BioMed Central 05.02.2020
BioMed Central Ltd
Springer Nature B.V
BMC
Subjects:
ISSN:1471-2288, 1471-2288
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary: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.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:1471-2288
1471-2288
DOI:10.1186/s12874-020-0910-x