BioPsychoSocial Assessment Tools for the Elderly - Assessment Summary Sheet

Test: Geriatric Functional Rating Scale (GFRS)

Year: 1975

Domain: Biological

Assessment Tool Category: Functional capacity

Variations/Translations: N/A

Setting: Retirement community and care institutions.

Method of Delivery: Self report interview administered by health care professional.

Description: The Geriatric Functional Rating Scale (GFRS) is used to evaluate the functional capacity of senior patients. The scale can aid in identifying if patients have the ability to function alone, with assistance or if they require institutionalization. The GFRS covers physical and mental conditions, functional abilities, support available from the community, living quarters, relatives and friends and the senior’s financial situation. Each section has various questions and a selection of responses which have an assigned numerical score.

Scoring/Interpretation: The final score is the sum of points for all of the measures and can range from -118 to +101. Scores >40 suggest that the individual is able to live in their own home setting, 20-40 indicates that individual requires some supportive care but does not need to enter an institution, and <20 suggests that the individual requires care in a suitable institution. iological of dialy livingrofessionalble.7,e.t Form (CMAI-SF) is a shortened version of the CMAI. ant manifests the behaviour on

Time to Administer: 30 minutes

Availability: Online and in Appendix 1 of Anderson, B., & Tom, L. (2005).

Software: N/A

Website: http://www.medalreg.com/qhc/medal/ch37/37_26/37-26-02-ver9.php3#result

Quantitative/Qualitative: Quantitative

Validity (Quantitative): Strong predictive validity – 83% of the subjects who had obtained an initial score indicative of their inability to function in the community were either dead or in an institution. 90% of those who obtained an initial score indicating that they were able to continue in the community, were not in an institution at the time of follow-up.

Reliability (Quantitative): Test-retest interclass correlation ranged from .91 to .98.

References:

Anderson, B., & Tom, L. (2005). Transition through the Continnum of Care in a Continuing Care Retirement Community: Can a Function Rating Scale be a Decision-Making Tool? Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 6(3), 205-208.

Grauer, H., & Birnbom, F. (1975). A geriatric functional rating scale to determine the need for institutional care. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 23(10), 472-476.

Haley, S., Jette, A., Coster, W., Kooyoomjian, J., Levenson, S., Heeren, T., & Ashba, J. (2002). Late Life Function and Disability Instrument II: Development and Evaluation of the Function Component. The Journals of Gerontology; Series A; Biological sciences and medical sciences, 57(4), M217-M222.

Jette, A., Haley, S., Coster, W., Kooyoomjian, J., Levenson, S., Heeren, T., & Ashba, J. (2002). Late Life Function and Disability Instrument I: Development and Evaluation of the Disability Component. The Journals of Gerontology; Series A; Biological sciences and medical sciences, 57(4), M209-M216.

Comments: Should be cautious of self-reporting bias in terms of under or overestimating individual’s functional status. There is also a lack of items to determine the presence of depressive symptoms.