Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-01T08:30:28.801Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Geriatric Functional Score Scale: A Preliminary Report on a Useful Tool for Assessing The Elderly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2010

Shari Lowe
Affiliation:
Chedoke-McMaster Hospitals
Kelly Durrell
Affiliation:
Chedoke-McMaster Hospitals

Abstract

Many functional scales used with the elederly are inadequate because they focus solely on physical functioning and were designed for younger adults who were orthopedically or neurologically impaired (e.g. the Katz, the Kenny). An appropriate assessment of the elderly's capabilities must include other components—mental functioning, tolerance and motivation, as well as physical functioning. A new assessment tool—the Geriatric Function Score Scale (G.F.S.S.) was developed for the elderly by Lowe (1984). It is an objective tool which examines physical, cognitive and motivational components of functioning and takes only 20 minutes to administer. The results of a preliminary study revealed that the score patients received on the G.F.S.S. was able to discriminate the level of placement (chronic care setting versus nursing home versus supervised setting, etc.) they would need upon discharge from the hospital. In addition, a positive conelation was found (r = .84) when comparing the G.F.S.S. with the Folstein Mini Mental Status Examination.

Résumé

Plusieurs échelles fonctionnelles utilisées auprès des gens âgés sont inadéquates parce qu'elles se limitent strictement au fonctionnement physique et ont été conçues pour de jeunes adultes victimes de détérioration neurologique ou orthopédique (e.g. Katz, Kenny). Une évaluation juste des capacités des gens âgés se doit d'inclure d'autres éléments—le fonctionnement au niveaqu physique et intellectuel, la tolérance, et la motivation. Lowe (1984) a mis au point un nouvel instrument d'évaluation destiné aux personnes âgées—le Geriatric Functional Score Scale. Il s'agit d'un outil objectif qui examine l'aspect physique et intellectuel ainsi que la motivation au niveau du comportement et peut être administré en moins de 20 minutes. Selon les résultats d'une étude préliminaire, le score des patients soumis au G.F.S.S. a aidé à déterminer le genre de placement qui suffirait le mieux à leurs besoins après avoir quitté l'hôpital (soins chroniques, centre d'accueil ou établissement où il y a surveillance, etc.) De plus, une corrélation positive a été établie (r = .84) en comparant le G.F.S.S. au Folstein Mini Mental Status Examination.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Donaldson, S. (1973). Donaldson ADL evaluation form. Boston, Massachusetts: Dept. of Physicial & Rehabilitation Medicine, 19.Google ScholarPubMed
2.Donaldson, S.W., Wagner, C.C. & Gersham, G.E. (1973). A unified ADL evaluation form. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 54, 175179.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Folstein, M.F., Folstein, S.E. & McHugh, P. (1975). ‘Mini Mental State’: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 12, 189198.Google Scholar
4.Katz, S. (1983). Assessing self-maintenance activities of daily living, mobility and instrumental activities of daily living. Journal of the A merican Geriatrics Society. 31, 721727.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Katz, S., Ford, A.B., Moskowitz, R.N., Jackson, B.A., Jaffe, M.W. (1963). Studies of illness in the aged. The index of ADL: A standardized measure of biological and psychological function. Journal of the A merican Medical Association. 185, 914919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Kertész, A. (1979). Aphasia and associated disorders: Taxonomy, localization and recovery. New York, New York: Grune and Stratton.Google Scholar
7.Kirshner, B. & Guyatt, G. (1985). A methodological framework for assessing health indices. Journal of Chronic Disease. 38, 1, 2736.Google Scholar
8.Lewisohn, P.M., Biglan, A. and Zeiss, A.M. (1976). Behavioural treatment of depression. In Davidson, P.O. (ed.) The Behavioural Management of Anxiety Depression and Pain. New York, New York: Brunner-Mazel.Google Scholar
9.Lowe, S. (1984). The geriatric functional scale score. Unpublished, submitted to the Geriatric Assessment Unit, Chedoke-McMaster Hospitals, Hamilton.Google Scholar
10.Mahoney, F.F. and Barthel, D.W. (1965). Functional evaluation: The Barthel index. Maryland State Medical Journal. 14, 6165.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Schoening, H.A., Anderegg, L., Bergstrom, D., Fonda, M., Steinke, N., Wrich, P. (1965). Numerical scoring of self-care status of patients. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 46, 689697.Google Scholar
12.Schoening, H.A. and Inverson, I.A. (1965). The Kenny self-care evaluation: A numerical measure of independence in activities of daily living. Minneapolis, Kenny Rehabilitation Institute.Google Scholar
13.Statistics Canada (1981). Canada's Elderly. Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
14.Vitaliano, P.P., Breen, A.R., Alberta, M.S. et al (1984). Memory, attention and functional status in community-residing alzheimer's type dementia patients and optimally healthy aged individuals. Journal of Gerontology. 39, 5864.Google Scholar
15.Williams, T.F. (1983). Comprehensive functional assessment: an overivew. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 31, 11, 637641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Wilson, L., Grant, K., Witsey, P. and Kerridge, D. (1973). Mental status of elderly hospital patients related to occupational therapists' assessment of activities of daily living. Gerontologia Clinica. 15, 197202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar