BackgroundCognitive frailty includes reversible and potentially reversible subtypes; the former is known as concurrent physical frailty and pre-mild cognitive impairment subjective cognitive decline, whereas the latter is known as concurrent PF and MCI. The diagnoses of pre-MCI SCD and MCI are based on clinical criteria and various subjective cognitive decline questionnaires. Heterogeneous assessment of cognitive impairment results in significant variability of CI, CF, and their subtype prevalence in various population-based studies.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the classification differences in CI and (...) CF subtypes from PF and normal cognition by applying clinical and objective cognitive criteria. Clinical criteria comprised Fried PF and clinical MCI criteria combined with the SCD questionnaire, whereas objective criteria comprised Fried PF and objective cognitive criteria based on the norm-adjusted six neuropsychological test scores.MethodsOf the 335 volunteers in this study, 191 were diagnosed with CI based on clinical cognitive diagnosis criteria, and 144 were identified as robust normal based on objective cognitive assessment from the community-dwelling older adult cohort. Individuals with clinical CI, including 94 with MCI and 97 with pre-MCI SCD, were reclassified into different z-score-derived MCI, pre-MCI SCD, and normal subgroups based on objective cognitive criteria. The classification diagnostic accuracy of normal cognition, PF, pre-MCI, MCI, CF, and CF subtypes based on clinical and objective criteria was compared before and after adjusting for age, sex, and education level.ResultsThe reclassification of objective assessments indicated better performance than that of clinical assessments in terms of discerning CI severity among different subgroups before adjusting for demographic factors. After covariate adjustment, clinical assessments significantly improved the ability to cognitively discriminate normal individuals from those with pre-MCI SCD and MCI but not the z-score-derived pre-MCI SCD and MCI groups from the robust normal group. Furthermore, the adjustment did not improve the ability to discriminate among individuals with reversible CF from those with potentially reversible CF and pre-MCI only SCD from MCI only SCD.ConclusionsObjective criteria showed better performance than clinical criteria in the diagnosis of individuals with CI or CF subtypes. Rapid clinical cognitive screening in combination with normative z-scores criteria is cost effective and sustainable in clinical practice. (shrink)

BackgroundFried physical frailty, with mobility frailty and non-motor frailty phenotypes, is a heterogeneous syndrome. The coexistence of the two phenotypes and cognitive impairment is referred to as cognitive frailty. It remains unknown whether frailty phenotype has a different association with hearing loss and tinnitus.MethodsOf the 5,328 community-dwelling older adults, 429 participants aged ≥58 years were enrolled in the study. The participants were divided into robust, mobility, and non-mobility frailty, mobility and non-mobility CF, and cognitive decline [subdivided into mild cognitive impairment (...) and pre-MCI] groups. The severity and presentations of HL and/or tinnitus were used as dependent variables in the multivariate logistic or nominal regression analyses with forward elimination adjusted for frailty phenotype stratifications and other covariates.ResultsPatients with physical frailty or who are robust were found to have lower probability of developing severe HL and tinnitus, and presented HL and/or tinnitus than those with only cognitive decline, or CF. Patients with RCF and non-mobility RCF had higher probability with less HL and tinnitus, and the presentation of HL and/or tinnitus than those with PRCF and mobility RCF. Other confounders, age, cognitive and social function, cardiovascular disease, depression, and body mass index, independently mediated the severity of HL and tinnitus, and presented HL and/or tinnitus.ConclusionFrailty phenotypes have divergent association with HL and tinnitus. Further research is required to understand the differential mechanisms and the personalized intervention of HL and tinnitus.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT2017K020. (shrink)