EHSAS Elderly Health Status Assessment & Screening
Screen now

A two-minute doorstep check for an older person's health.

EHSAS is a free, validated screening tool that helps community health workers, families, and clinicians spot early signs of frailty in older adults — and know when it's time to seek a fuller check-up.

Free & open access — CC BY 4.0 No registration, no licence fee Built for ASHA and CHW use
Kshatri JS, Sahu SR, Behera SD, et al. Age and Ageing 2025;54:afaf344.
76.3%
Sensitivity
76.5%
Specificity
93.2%
Negative predictive value
<12 min
Time to administer
How the check-in works

Eleven short questions, one picture, one decision

EHSAS was built and validated for use by Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs) at the doorstep — but it is simple enough for a family member to use at home, and precise enough for a clinician to trust.

1

Ask eleven yes/no questions

Covering mobility, function, nutrition, vision, hearing, continence, mood, and memory — asked exactly as written, about change over the last six months.

2

Look, don't ask, for frailty

The health worker picks the picture that best matches the person's gait, strength, and use of walking aids — no extra questions needed.

3

Refer only when it matters

Three or more "yes" answers, or moderate frailty or worse, triggers a referral for a full Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment at the nearest facility.

Try EHSAS

Run a check-in

This is the actual validated EHSAS-C screening instrument. It works fully in your browser — nothing you enter here is saved or sent anywhere. Use it for training, demonstration, or an individual screening in the field.

EHSAS check-in

This check-in asks about changes over the last six months. Answer as the older person would, or with help from a family member if needed.

EHSAS is designed and validated for adults aged 60 and above.

Talk to a doctor now (eSanjeevani) Find the nearest health centre

EHSAS referral slip

Age—
EHSAS score (Q1–11)—
Frailty (Q12)—
Domains flagged—
Recommendation—
Notes / chronic conditions—
Date—

Generated by the EHSAS check-in tool. This is a screening result, not a diagnosis — please carry this slip to the primary health centre.

Peer-reviewed

How well EHSAS performs

EHSAS was developed and validated over three phases — item generation and expert content validation, exploratory factor analysis, and diagnostic accuracy testing against moderate-to-severe frailty (Fried phenotype) in 200 rural older adults, with test–retest reliability in a further subsample of 60.

0.796
AUC on ROC analysis (95% CI 0.71–0.88)
>0.7
Cronbach's alpha — internal consistency
0.79–1.00
Cohen's kappa — test–retest, 2 months
≥3
Referral cut-off on 11 items

Domains covered, and the comparator tool each was validated against

DomainEHSAS questionComparator instrument used for validation
General trajectoryDecline in overall health, last 6 monthsFried Frailty Phenotype (criterion variable)
MobilityNeeds help walkingBerg Balance Scale
Function (ADL)Needs help dressing, bathing, or groomingKatz Index of Independence in ADL
NutritionUnintentional weight lossMini Nutritional Assessment (MNA)
VisionBlurry or double visionSnellen / Tumbling-E chart
HearingDifficulty hearing, especially with noiseHearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly — Screening
ContinenceDifficulty controlling bladderUrogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6)
ConstipationConstipation on more than half of daysBristol Stool Form Scale
MoodLoss of motivation for daily tasksGeriatric Depression Scale
DeliriumDisorientation to time or place4AT
CognitionIncreasing forgetfulnessMini-Cog
Frailty (Q12, pictogram)Observed gait, strength, assistive devicesFried Frailty Phenotype
Kshatri JS, Sahu SR, Behera SD, Janssen D, Shenkin SD, Pati S. Development and validation of the multidimensional elderly health status assessment and screening (EHSAS) tool for community-dwelling older people in rural India. Age and Ageing. 2025;54:afaf344. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afaf344
12 languages

Translations

EHSAS was developed and validated in Odia, then formally translated into English for dissemination (Kshatri et al., Age and Ageing, 2025) — these two carry the same psychometric validation as the published tool. The other ten languages below are field translations, made for accessibility, and are marked as such in the tool itself. If you plan to use one of them for research (rather than routine field screening), please have it reviewed by a bilingual clinician first, or get in touch about running it through the same validation process used for English and Odia.

LanguageStatus
EnglishValidated (Age & Ageing, 2025)Use it →
ଓଡ଼ିଆ — Odia (original)Validated (Age & Ageing, 2025)Use it →
हिन्दी — HindiAvailable — field translationUse it →
বাংলা — BengaliAvailable — field translationUse it →
தமிழ் — TamilAvailable — field translationUse it →
తెలుగు — TeluguAvailable — field translationUse it →
मराठी — MarathiAvailable — field translationUse it →
ગુજરાતી — GujaratiAvailable — field translationUse it →
ಕನ್ನಡ — KannadaAvailable — field translationUse it →
മലയാളം — MalayalamAvailable — field translationUse it →
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ — PunjabiAvailable — field translationUse it →
اردو — UrduAvailable — field translationUse it →

The frailty pictogram (question 12) is language-independent by design, so it needs no translation. Only the English and Odia item sets carry a formal psychometric validation of their own; the other ten were translated for field accessibility, not separately validated. If you can help formally validate EHSAS in a further language or setting, we'd like to hear from you.

To propose a translation, or partner with us on formally validating one, please write to us at kshatri.js@icmr.gov.in.

For ASHAs, ANMs & CHOs

Instruction manual

The full field manual for community health workers administering EHSAS-C. Open any section below to read it, or use the button to save the whole manual as a PDF straight from your browser — no separate file to host or maintain.

EHSAS helps community health workers identify early signs of health decline in older adults (60 years and above), so they can be referred in time for a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) at a primary health facility. It is a screening tool, not a diagnostic one — its job is to sort a large population into "likely fine for now" and "needs a closer look", quickly and reliably, without specialist equipment.

It is meant to be used by Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs), Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs), Community Health Officers (CHOs), Anganwadi workers, or any community-level health worker with basic literacy — during home visits, or at village or ward-level screening camps. No medical background is required, but the orientation in section 2 below should be completed first.

New health workers should complete a half-day orientation before using EHSAS independently, covering:

  • A walkthrough of all 12 items and the probes in section 6
  • Practice administering the tool on 2–3 volunteers, observed by a supervisor or trained peer
  • The referral pathway for your facility (who to refer to, and how)
  • How to handle the situations described in section 7

Consent is verbal, not written, but must still be genuine: explain who you are, why you're asking, that participation is voluntary, that it takes 5–10 minutes, and that a "Yes" answer only leads to a referral for a further check-up — never a penalty or a mandatory hospital visit. If the person declines, thank them, note it in the register as "screening declined", and do not press further.

  • Printed EHSAS-C tool forms (one per person), in the language the person is most comfortable in
  • Black or blue pen
  • Blank referral slips
  • CHW record register
  • Clipboard or file folder for field work
  • Unique health ID list for the village, if one exists
  • A private or semi-private space to talk — a corner of the courtyard is enough; a crowded room is not
  • Greet the older person respectfully, by name if known, and sit at their eye level rather than standing over them.
  • Ask whether they would prefer to answer alone or with a family member present — some questions (bladder control, mood, memory) can feel embarrassing in front of others.
  • Explain the purpose in plain language: "We are doing a simple health check-up to find out if you may need further care at the health centre. This will take 5–10 minutes, and there are no right or wrong answers."
  • Keep your tone unhurried and neutral throughout — older adults often under-report problems if they sense the health worker is in a rush or judging them.
  1. Fill in the person's name, age, sex, and ID at the top of the form before you start.
  2. Ask questions 1–11 exactly as written, in order. All are Yes/No questions about the last six months, not lifetime problems — a fall eight years ago doesn't count; a new problem with balance this year does.
  3. Mark "Yes" only if the person clearly confirms the problem exists; mark "No" if it is absent, or if the answer is genuinely unclear after a probe.
  4. Address the older person directly, even if a family member is present. If they are unable to answer (e.g. significant hearing loss or confusion), consult the caregiver — and note on the form that the answer was proxy-reported.
  5. Do not prompt or suggest an answer. If a question isn't understood, repeat it once more slowly, then use the probe from section 6 — never rephrase in a way that hints at the "correct" answer.
  6. After question 11, step back and observe the person (walking to the door, standing up from a chair, general build and alertness) to complete question 12 — see section 8.
  7. Note any current complaints or known chronic conditions (diabetes, hypertension, arthritis, etc.) in the remarks box — this helps the receiving clinician, even for people who are not referred today.
  8. Total the "Yes" answers, apply the referral rule in section 9, and tell the person the outcome before you leave.

Use only if a question isn't understood on first asking — these clarify without leading the answer.

QTopicSuggested probe
1General decline"Have you been feeling generally weaker or more unwell in the last 6 months compared to before?"
2Walking"Do you need help, like holding someone's hand or using a stick, to walk at home or outside?"
3Dressing/bathing"Do you need help from someone while bathing, dressing, or combing your hair?"
4Weight loss"Have you lost weight in the past few months without trying or dieting?"
5Vision"Do you have difficulty seeing faces, reading, or walking due to poor eyesight?"
6Hearing"Do you find it hard to follow conversation, especially with background noise?"
7Bladder"Do you sometimes leak urine, or feel you can't hold it until you reach the toilet?"
8Constipation"Do you have trouble passing stool on more than half the days in a week?"
9Motivation"Do you feel uninterested or unwilling to do your usual daily tasks?"
10Disorientation"Have there been times you were confused about the time, day, or where you were?"
11Forgetfulness"Do you often forget where you kept things, or repeat questions you've already asked?"
  • Hearing loss: face the person directly, speak slowly rather than loudly, and use the printed form as a visual aid if they can read.
  • Cannot read or is not fluent in the printed language: ask every question aloud in the local language, using the probe if needed — the tool does not require the participant to read anything themselves.
  • No caregiver available and the person cannot answer reliably (e.g. marked confusion): complete what you can, mark unanswered items as "unable to assess" rather than guessing "No", and note this clearly for the receiving clinician — this itself is often a reason for referral.
  • Caregiver and older person disagree: record the older person's own answer where they are able to give one; note the caregiver's differing view in the remarks box rather than overwriting the response.
  • Bedridden or unable to stand for question 12: judge frailty from the closest applicable cues — strength of grip, ability to sit up unassisted, overall condition — and note in remarks that gait could not be observed directly.
  • Person becomes distressed by a question (this can happen with the mood or memory items): pause, reassure them that this is a routine check for everyone their age, and continue only if they're comfortable to do so.

This item is observed and judged by the health worker, not asked as a question. Watch the person walk a few steps, stand up from a chair, and note their general build, before choosing the picture that best fits:

  • Fit — walks independently and steadily, no visible frailty
  • Mildly Frail — slower or more cautious gait, but no aid used
  • Moderately Frail — uses a stick, furniture, or another person for support while walking
  • Severely Frail — needs a wheelchair, or help from two people to move short distances
  • Terminally Ill — bedbound, or in the final stages of a known terminal illness

When in doubt between two adjacent levels, choose the more severe one — this errs on the side of referral, which is the safer default for a screening tool.

Add up the "Yes" answers to questions 1–11 (maximum score: 11). Refer for Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment at the nearest facility if the person:

  • Scores 3 or more out of 11, or
  • Is judged Moderately Frail or worse on question 12 — regardless of the score on 1–11.

Worked example: an older person answers "Yes" to walking difficulty, weight loss, and forgetfulness (score = 3), and is observed to walk steadily without an aid (Mildly Frail). Score of 3 meets the referral threshold on its own, so this person should be referred, even though their observed frailty is mild.

This cut-off was chosen (from ROC analysis against the Fried frailty phenotype) to favour sensitivity and a high negative predictive value — in practice, this means EHSAS is deliberately tuned to occasionally refer people who turn out not to need CGA, rather than miss people who do.

  • Attach the completed EHSAS form to the referral slip.
  • Clearly record the person's name and age, the health worker's name and contact number, and the date.
  • Explain to the person and family, in simple terms, what a CGA involves — a fuller check-up covering physical, mental, and social wellbeing — and that it should happen as soon as reasonably possible, not urgently/emergently unless the presentation suggests otherwise.
  • Record the visit, the score, and whether a referral was made in the CHW register.
  • Where possible, follow up in 1–2 weeks to confirm the person attended, and note the outcome. Repeated non-attendance is worth flagging to your supervisor, as it may point to access barriers (distance, cost of travel, lack of an accompanying family member) rather than the person's own reluctance.
  • Re-screen at the next routine visit for anyone not referred today — EHSAS reflects a point in time, not a permanent status.

To keep EHSAS screening consistent across health workers over time:

  • Directly observe each new health worker administering EHSAS at least twice before they work unsupervised.
  • Periodically spot-check a small sample of completed forms each month for missing items, inconsistent marking, or unusually high/low referral rates from one worker compared to peers in a similar area.
  • Common errors to watch for: leading questions, skipping the probe step, marking "No" by default when an answer is unclear rather than asking again, and treating question 12 as something to ask rather than observe.
  • Refresh training annually, or sooner if the tool, referral pathway, or catchment facility changes.
  • Explain the tool in simple language
  • Respect privacy and ask gently
  • Use a caregiver only when the elder truly cannot answer, and note it
  • Observe, don't ask, for question 12
  • Refer as per the scoring criteria — no exceptions
  • Don't rush through questions
  • Don't judge, react, or laugh at responses
  • Don't mark "Yes" or "No" unless you're sure — mark "unable to assess" instead
  • Don't rephrase a question to hint at an answer
  • Don't forget to attach the form to the referral slip

How often should someone be re-screened? At every routine home visit or health camp — commonly every 6–12 months for someone not currently referred, or sooner if their health changes noticeably.

What if the person is under 60? EHSAS is validated for ages 60 and above. It isn't designed or tested for younger adults, even if they have age-related health complaints.

Can I use it with someone who has known dementia? Yes, with a caregiver's help for items the person can't reliably self-report — mark these as proxy-reported. A known dementia diagnosis is, in itself, usually reason enough to refer for CGA regardless of the EHSAS score.

Does a "Yes" answer mean the person definitely has that problem? No — EHSAS is a screen, not a diagnosis. A "Yes" flags a domain worth a closer look at the facility; it is not itself a clinical finding.

Which language should I use? Whichever the person is most comfortable conversing in. The tool is available in multiple Indian languages on this website — see the Translations section above.

Researchers and programme managers outside this study site sometimes ask whether EHSAS can be adapted for a different state, country, or cadre of health worker. In our experience, the following is worth checking before doing so:

  • Confirm the referral pathway you'll point people to actually offers a form of CGA, or your referrals will lead nowhere.
  • If translating to a new language, follow a forward-translation, expert back-translation, and cognitive-interview process (see the Translations section) rather than a direct machine translation, given this is a clinical screening instrument.
  • Re-validate the cut-off locally where feasible, since sensitivity/specificity can shift with a different population's baseline frailty prevalence — the ≥3 threshold was derived in rural Odisha and may not transfer perfectly everywhere.
  • Keep the frailty pictogram (question 12) as-is; it was deliberately designed to be language- and literacy-independent, which is part of what makes it portable.

We're happy to discuss adaptations directly — see the contact details in the About section below.

The project

About & resources

EHSAS sits inside a larger implementation research programme to build and test community-to-facility models of geriatric care for rural India, funded by the Wellcome Trust/DBT India Alliance.

Where it comes from

Built on the DISHA-G cohort of over 18,000 older adults in Tigiria, Cuttack District, Odisha, run through the Model Rural Health Research Unit (MRHRU) of the ICMR–National Institute of Health Research, Bhubaneswar (formerly ICMR–RMRC Bhubaneswar).

What it feeds into

Older adults identified as high-risk are referred for facility-based Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (EHSAS-F), and the whole pathway is being piloted as an exploratory cluster-randomised trial under the National Programme for Health Care of the Elderly.

How it's evaluated

Implementability is assessed using the EPIS (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment) framework, alongside qualitative interviews with health workers, clients, and policy makers.

Team & collaborators

Jaya Singh KshatriICMR–National Institute of Health Research, Bhubaneswar · Maastricht University
Sanghamitra PatiICMR–National Institute of Health Research, Bhubaneswar
Susan D. ShenkinUniversity of Edinburgh
Daisy J. A. JanssenMaastricht University
Stewart MercerUniversity of Edinburgh
David WellerUniversity of Edinburgh
Subrata Kumar PaloICMR–National Institute of Health Research, Bhubaneswar
Soumya Ranjan Sahu & Supriya Darshini BeheraICMR–National Institute of Health Research, Bhubaneswar

Registration & ethics

Clinical Trials Registry of India: CTRI/2023/07/055661. Ethics approval: ICMR-RMRC Institutional Human Ethics Committee (now the ICMR–National Institute of Health Research, Bhubaneswar), ICMR-RMRC/IHEC-2022/109.

Funding

The Wellcome Trust/DBT India Alliance (IA/CPHE/21/1/505948). The funders had no role in study design, analysis, or the decision to publish.

Reuse & attribution

EHSAS is published open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence. You may use, adapt, and redistribute it with attribution to the original publication. Please write to us before publishing a new-language or adapted version.

For manuscripts using EHSAS

Citing & acknowledging EHSAS

If your study uses the EHSAS tool, please cite the validation paper below. Cite the protocol paper too if you're also drawing on the parent implementation study or its methods. Two ready-to-adapt templates follow, for your Methods and Acknowledgements sections.

Cite the tool

Kshatri JS, Sahu SR, Behera SD, Janssen D, Shenkin SD, Pati S. Development and validation of the multidimensional elderly health status assessment and screening (EHSAS) tool for community-dwelling older people in rural India. Age and Ageing. 2025;54:afaf344. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afaf344

Cite the parent study protocol (optional — for methods/implementation context)

Kshatri JS, Shenkin SD, Mercer S, Weller D, Palo SK, Pati S, Janssen DJA, Pati S. Improving health outcomes among older adults in India: effectiveness and implementability of a novel comprehensive geriatric assessment based intervention [version 3]. Wellcome Open Research. 2024;8:414. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.19796.3

Suggested acknowledgement, for your Methods or Acknowledgements section

Older adults in this study were screened using the Elderly Health Status Assessment and Screening (EHSAS) tool, a validated, multidimensional community screening instrument for older adults, developed for use by community health workers in low-resource settings (Kshatri et al., Age and Ageing, 2025). EHSAS is freely available under a CC BY 4.0 licence at ehsas.mrhru.in.

Suggested methods paragraph, if you also report scoring and the referral cut-off

Screening was conducted using the EHSAS-C tool, comprising 11 yes/no items spanning mobility, function, nutrition, vision, hearing, continence, constipation, mood, delirium, and cognition, plus a twelfth item in which the health worker rates observed frailty on a five-point pictorial scale. A score of three or more positive responses on items 1–11, or a frailty rating of moderate or worse, was taken to indicate a need for referral for Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, consistent with the validated cut-off reported by Kshatri et al. (Age and Ageing, 2025; sensitivity 76.3%, specificity 76.5%, negative predictive value 93.2%).