Dataset Information

Research priorities for high-quality geriatric emergency care: medication management, screening, and prevention and functional assessment.

ABSTRACT: Geriatric adults represent an increasing proportion of emergency department (ED) users and can be particularly vulnerable to acute illnesses. Health care providers have recently begun to focus on the development of quality indicators (QIs) to define a minimal standard of care.The original objective of this project was to develop additional ED-specific QIs for older patients within the domains of medication management, screening and prevention, and functional assessment, but the quantity and quality of evidence were insufficient to justify unequivocal minimal standards of care for these three domains. Accordingly, the authors modified the project objectives to identify key research opportunities within these three domains that can be used to develop QIs in the future.Each domain was assigned one or two content experts who created potential QIs based on a systematic review of the literature, supplemented by expert opinion. Candidate QIs were then reviewed by four groups: the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) Geriatric Task Force, the SAEM Geriatric Interest Group, and audiences at the 2008 SAEM Annual Meeting and the 2009 American Geriatrics Society Annual Meeting, using anonymous audience response system technology as well as verbal and written feedback.High-quality evidence based on patient-oriented outcomes was insufficient or nonexistent for all three domains. The participatory audiences did not reach a consensus on any of the proposed QIs. Key research questions for medication management (three), screening and prevention (two), and functional assessment (three) are presented based on proposed QIs that the majority of participants accepted.In assessing a minimal standard of care by which to systematically derive geriatric QIs for medication management, screening and prevention, and functional assessment, compelling clinical research evidence is lacking. Patient-oriented research questions that are essential to justify and characterize future QIs within these domains are described.

SUBMITTER: Carpenter CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3117251 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Research priorities for high-quality geriatric emergency care: medication management, screening, and prevention and functional assessment.

Carpenter Christopher R CR Heard Kennon K Wilber Scott S Ginde Adit A AA Stiffler Kirk K Gerson Lowell W LW Wenger Neal S NS Miller Douglas K DK

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 20110601 6

<h4>Background</h4>Geriatric adults represent an increasing proportion of emergency department (ED) users and can be particularly vulnerable to acute illnesses. Health care providers have recently begun to focus on the development of quality indicators (QIs) to define a minimal standard of care.<h4>Objectives</h4>The original objective of this project was to develop additional ED-specific QIs for older patients within the domains of medication management, screening and prevention, and functional ...[more]

PMID: 21676064

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdherence to medication is estimated to be around 50% for chronically ill patients in high-income countries. Improving the effectiveness of adherence interventions could have a far greater impact on population health than any improvement in specific medical treatments. Mobile health (mHealth) is one of the most effective solutions for helping patients improve their medication intake, notably through the use of mobile apps with reminder systems. With more than 327,000 apps available in the mHealth field, it is difficult for health care professionals and patients alike to choose which apps to recommend and use.ObjectiveWe aim to carry out a systematic search of medication management smartphone apps available in France that send reminders to patients and assess their quality using a validated scale.MethodsMobile apps were identified in October and November 2022 after a systematic keyword search on the 2 main app download platforms: App Store (Apple Inc) and Google Play Store. Inclusion criteria were free availability, date of last update, and availability in French. Next, 2 health care professionals independently evaluated the included apps using the French version of the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS-F), an objective scoring system validated for assessing the overall quality of apps in the mHealth field. An intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to determine interrater reliability.ResultsIn total, 960 apps were identified and 49 were selected (25 from the App Store and 24 from the Google Play Store). Interrater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.92; 95% CI 0.87-0.95; P<.001). The average MARS-F score was 3.56 (SD 0.49) for apps on the App Store and 3.51 (SD 0.46) for those on the Google Play Store, with 10 apps scoring above 4 out of 5. Further, 2 apps were tested in at least one randomized controlled trial and showed positive results. The 2 apps with the highest ratings were Mediteo rappel de médicaments (Mediteo GmbH) and TOM rappel medicaments, pilule (Innovation6 GmbH), available on both platforms. Each app's MARS-F score was weakly correlated with user ratings on the App Store and moderately correlated on the Google Play Store.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study that used a validated scoring system to evaluate medication management apps that send medication reminders. The quality of the apps was heterogeneous, with only 2 having been studied in a randomized controlled trial with positive results. The evaluation of apps in real-life conditions by patients is necessary to determine their acceptability and effectiveness. Certification of apps is also essential to help health care professionals and patients identify validated apps.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adult delirium is often unrecognized in the emergency department (ED), yet the most compelling research questions to overcome knowledge-to-practice deficits remain undefined. The Geriatric Emergency care Applied Research (GEAR) Network was organized to identify and prioritize delirium clinical questions.MethodsGEAR identified and engaged 49 transdisciplinary stakeholders including emergency physicians, geriatricians, nurses, social workers, pharmacists, and patient advocates. Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews, clinical questions were derived, medical librarian electronic searches were conducted, and applicable research evidence was synthesized for ED delirium detection, prevention, and management. The scoping review served as the foundation for a consensus conference to identify the highest priority research foci.ResultsIn the scoping review, 27 delirium detection "instruments" were described in 48 ED studies and used variable criterion standards with the result of delirium prevalence ranging from 6% to 38%. Clinician gestalt was the most common "instrument" evaluated with sensitivity ranging from 0% to 81% and specificity from 65% to 100%. For delirium management, 15 relevant studies were identified, including one randomized controlled trial. Some intervention studies targeted clinicians via education and others used clinical pathways. Three medications were evaluated to reduce or prevent ED delirium. No intervention consistently prevented or treated delirium. After reviewing the scoping review results, the GEAR stakeholders identified ED delirium prevention interventions not reliant on additional nurse or physician effort as the highest priority research.ConclusionsTransdisciplinary stakeholders prioritize ED delirium prevention studies that are not reliant on health care worker tasks instead of alternative research directions such as defining etiologic delirium phenotypes to target prevention or intervention strategies.

Project description:Objectives:Medication errors continue to contribute substantially to global morbidity and mortality. In the context of the recent launch of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Third Global Patient Safety Challenge: Medication Without Harm, we sought to establish agreement on research priorities for medication safety. Methods:We undertook a consensus prioritisation exercise using an approach developed by the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative. Based on a combination of productivity and citations, we identified leading researchers in patient and medication safety and invited them to participate. We also extended the invitation to a further pool of experts from the WHO Global Patient Safety Network. All experts independently generated research ideas, which they then independently scored based on the criteria of: answerability, effectiveness, innovativeness, implementation, burden reduction and equity. An overall Research Priority Score and Average Expert Agreement were calculated for each research question. Findings:131 experts submitted 333 research ideas, and 42 experts then scored the proposed research questions. The top prioritised research areas were: (1) deploying and scaling technology to enhance medication safety; (2) developing guidelines and standard operating procedures for high-risk patients, medications and contexts; (3) score-based approaches to predicting high-risk patients and situations; (4) interventions to increase patient medication literacy; (5) focused training courses for health professionals; and (6) universally applicable pictograms to avoid medication-related harm. Whilst there was a focus on promoting patient education and involvement across resource settings, priorities identified in high-resource settings centred on the optimisation of existing systems through technology. In low- and middle-resource settings, priorities focused on identifying systemic issues contributing to high-risk situations. Conclusions:WHO now plans to work with global, regional and national research funding agencies to catalyse the investment needed to enable teams to pursue these research priorities in medication safety across high-, middle- and low-resource country settings.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of older adults with a high risk of frailty and severe illness continues to increase. Moreover, physiological change and multiple comorbidities are challenging to triage in geriatrics. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate variables to predict 28-day mortality and develop a screening tool to predict mortality and lifesaving intervention among geriatric patients in the emergency department (ED).MethodsThis study was a retrospective, single-center, observational study at the ED of Ramathibodi Hospital, Bangkok. Patients aged ≥ 65 years who visited the ED between January 2018 and December 2019 were enrolled. In the development cohort, univariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of 28-day mortality in older patients. A predictive model for mortality and the need for lifesaving intervention was developed by multivariable logistic regression. In addition, the score was validated with internal validation and compared between development and validation set by chi-square.ResultsWe enrolled 1393 patients. In the development cohort, among these 1002 patients, 103 (10.3%) of whom died within 28 days. Malignancy, shock index (SI), systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 100 mmHg, and altered mentation were independent risk factors of 28-day mortality. We developed new screening tools named the S-TRIAGE score, which has the respiratory rate (< 11, > 22 breaths/min), the ratio of pulse oximetric saturation to the fraction of inspired oxygen (< 420, 420-450), SI (> 1, 0.6-0.99), SBP < 100 mmHg, body temperature (< 36, > 37.5 °C), and mental change. The area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the S-TRIAGE score in the validation cohort was 0.826 [95% confidence interval (95%CI) 0.773-0.879] in predicting mortality and lifesaving intervention, and the clinical score classified patients into five groups.ConclusionThis study showed malignancy, hypotension, increased SI, and mental status change were predictive factors for 28-day mortality in older adults in the ED. The screening tool risk score for geriatrics used in this study is potentially a good predictor of mortality and lifesaving intervention in high-risk older patients in the ED.

Project description:ObjectivesEdication management is a process in which medications are selected, procured, delivered, prescribed, reviewed, administered and monitored to assure high-quality patient care and safety. This paper explores clinicians' attitudes towards medication management which is both open to influence and strongly linked to successful changes in mediation behaviour. We aimed to investigate effects of engaging in participatory action research to improve emergency medicine clinicians' attitudes to safety in medication management.SettingEmergency department of one university affiliated hospital.ParticipantsA total of 85 clinicians including nurses and physicians partook as participants. Eight managers and clinicians participated as representatives.DesignData are drawn from two-cycle participatory action research. Initially, a situation analysis on the current medication management and clinician views regarding medication management was conducted using three focus groups. Evaluation and reflection data were obtained through qualitative interviews. All qualitative data were analysed using content analysis.ResultsClinicians initially expressed negative attitudes towards existing and new plans for medication management, in that they were critical of current medication-related policy and procedures, as well as wary of the potential relevance and utility of potential changes to medication management. Through the action research, improvement actions were implemented including interprofessional courses, pharmacist-led interventions and the development of new guidelines regarding medication management. Participants and their representatives were engaged in all participatory action research stages with different levels of involvement. Extracted results from evaluation and reflection stages revealed that by engaging in the action research and practice new interventions, clinicians' attitude towards medication management was improved.ConclusionsThe results support the impact of participatory action research on enhancing clinicians' positive attitudes through their involvement in planning and implementing safety enhancing aspects of medication management.

Project description:IntroductionEmergency departments (ED) manage a wide variety of critical medical presentations. Traumatic, neurologic, and cardiac crises are among the most prevalent types of emergencies treated in an ED setting. The high volume of presentations has led to collaborative partnerships in research and process development between experts in emergency medicine (EM) and other disciplines. While psychosis is a medical emergency frequently treated in the ED, there remains a paucity of evidence-based literature highlighting best practices for management of psychotic presentations in the ED. In the absence of collaborative research, development of best practice guidelines cannot begin. A working group convened to develop a set of high-priority research questions to address the knowledge gaps in the care of psychotic patients in the ED. This article is the product of a subgroup considering "Special Populations: Psychotic Spectrum Disorders," from the 2016 Coalition on Psychiatric Emergencies first Research Consensus Conference on Acute Mental Illness.MethodsParticipants were identified with expertise in psychosis from EM, emergency psychiatry, emergency psychology, clinical research, governmental agencies, and patient advocacy groups. Background literature reviews were performed prior to the in-person meeting. A nominal group technique was employed to develop group consensus on the highest priority research gaps. Following the nominal group technique, input was solicited from all participants during the meeting, questions were iteratively focused and revised, voted on, and then ranked by importance.ResultsThe group developed 28 separate questions. After clarification and voting, the group identified six high-priority research areas. These questions signify the perceived gaps in psychosis research in emergency settings. Questions were further grouped into two topic areas: screening and identification; and intervention and management strategies.ConclusionWhile psychosis has become a more common presentation in the ED, standardized screening, intervention, and outcome measurement for psychosis has not moved beyond attention to agitation management. As improved outpatient-intervention protocols are developed for treatment of psychosis, it is imperative that parallel protocols are developed for delivery in the ED setting.

Dataset Information

Research priorities for high-quality geriatric emergency care: medication management, screening, and prevention and functional assessment.

Publications

Research priorities for high-quality geriatric emergency care: medication management, screening, and prevention and functional assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets