Dataset Information

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in the emergency department.

ABSTRACT: Changing global demography is resulting in older people presenting to emergency departments (EDs) in greater numbers than ever before. They present with greater urgency and are more likely to be admitted to hospital or re-attend and utilize greater resources. They experience longer waits for care and are less likely to be satisfied with their experiences. Not only that, but older people suffer poorer health outcomes after ED attendance, with higher mortality rates and greater dependence in activities of daily living or rates of admission to nursing homes. Older people's assessment and management in the ED can be complex, time consuming, and require specialist skills. The interplay of multiple comorbidities and functional decline result in the complex state of frailty that can predispose to poor health outcomes and greater care needs. Older people with frailty may present to services in an atypical fashion requiring detailed, multidimensional, and increasingly multidisciplinary care to provide the correct diagnosis and management as well as appropriate placement for ongoing care or admission avoidance. Specific challenges such as delirium, functional decline, or carer strain need to be screened for and managed appropriately. Identifying patients with specific frailty syndromes can be critical to identifying those at highest risk of poor outcomes and most likely to benefit from further specialist interventions. Models of care are evolving that aim to deliver multidimensional assessment and management by multidisciplinary specialist care teams (comprehensive geriatric assessment). Increasingly, these models are demonstrating improved outcomes, including admission avoidance or reduced death and dependence. Delivering this in the ED is an evolving area of practice that adapts the principles of geriatric medicine for the urgent-care environment.

SUBMITTER: Ellis G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4246995 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been shown to improve outcomes in hospitalised older adults; however, there is currently no compelling evidence to support CGA interventions within the Emergency Department (ED). The aim of this study is to explore the clinical and process outcomes of older adults who receive ED-CGA over a period of six months after their initial ED attendance. Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: The STrengthening the Reporting of the OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) standardised reporting guidelines will be adhered to. Older adults aged ≥65 years who score ≥2 on the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) tool and present to the ED with a medical complaint during the operational hours of the dedicated interdisciplinary team, will be considered eligible for recruitment. Demographic and health assessment information will be obtained at the ED index attendance followed by completion of an interdisciplinary CGA. A dedicated research nurse will complete follow-up telephone interviews with participants at 30 days and six months. The primary outcome will be incidence of hospital admission from the ED index attendance. Secondary outcomes will include functional decline, patient satisfaction with the ED index attendance, unscheduled ED reattendance(s), unscheduled hospital (re)admission(s), nursing home admission(s), healthcare utilisation, and death. Descriptive statistics will be used to profile the characteristics of the study participants and multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis will be used to analyse risk of adverse outcomes. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was granted by the University of Limerick Hospital Group Research Ethics Committee (107/2021). The authors will disseminate study findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at national and international conferences. Patient and public involvement will be sought from a panel of older adults at the Ageing Research Centre in the University of Limerick. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05252182.

Project description:BackgroundComprehensive geriatric assessment provided in hospital wards in frail patients admitted to hospital has been shown to reduce mortality and increase the likelihood of living at home later. Systematic geriatric assessment provided in emergency departments (ED) may be effective for reducing days in hospital and unnecessary hospital admissions, but this has not yet been proven in randomised trials.MethodsWe conducted a single-centre, randomised controlled trial with a parallel-group, superiority design in an academic hospital ED. ED patients aged ≥ 75 years who were frail, or at risk of frailty, as defined by the Clinical Frailty Scale, were included in the trial. Patients were recruited during the period between December 11, 2018 and June 7, 2019, and followed up for 365 days. For the intervention group, systematic geriatric assessment was added to their standard care in the ED, whereas the control group received standard care only. The primary outcome was cumulative hospital stay during 365-day follow-up. The secondary outcomes included: admission rate from the index visit, total hospital admissions, ED-readmissions, proportion of patients living at home at 365 days, 365-day mortality, and fall-related ED-visits.ResultsA total of 432 patients, 63 % female, with median age of 85 years, formed the analytic sample of 213 patients in the intervention group and 219 patients in the control group. Cumulative hospital stay during one-year follow-up as rate per 100 person-years for the intervention and control groups were: 3470 and 3149 days, respectively, with rate ratio of 1.10 (95 % confidence interval, 0.55-2.19, P = .78). Admission rates to hospital wards from the index ED visit for the intervention and control groups were: 62 and 70 %, respectively (P = .10). No significant differences were observed between the groups for any outcomes.ConclusionSystematic geriatric assessment for older adults with frailty in the ED did not reduce hospital stay during one-year follow-up. No statistically significant difference was observed for any secondary outcomes. More coordinated, continuous interventions should be tested for potential benefits in long-term outcomes.Trial registrationThe trial was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number and date NCT03751319 23/11/2018).

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:BackgroundFoot problems are common in older adults and associated with poorer physical function, falls, frailty and reduced quality of life. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), a multidisciplinary process that is considered the gold standard of care for older adults, does not routinely include podiatry assessment and intervention in hospitalized older adults.AimsTo introduce foot assessment to inpatient CGA to determine prevalence of foot disease, foot disease risk factors and inappropriate footwear use, assess inter-rater reliability of foot assessments, determine current podiatry input and examine associations between patient characteristics and foot disease risks.MethodsProspective, observational cohort study of older adults on geriatric rehabilitation wards. Foot assessment completed using the Queensland Foot Disease Form (QFDF) in addition to routine CGA.ResultsFifty-two patients (median age [inter-quartile range] 86.4 [79.2-90.3] years, 54% female) were included. Six patients (12%) had foot disease and 13 (25%) had a 'high risk' or 'at risk' foot. Foot disease risk factor prevalence was peripheral arterial disease 9 (17%); neuropathy 10 (19%) and foot deformity 11 (22%). Forty-one patients (85%) wore inappropriate footwear. Inter-rater agreement was substantial on presence of foot disease and arterial disease, fair to moderate on foot deformity and fair on neuropathy and inappropriate footwear. Eight patients (15%) saw a podiatrist during admission: 5 with foot disease, 1 'at risk' and 2 'low risk' for foot disease. Patients with an at risk foot or foot disease had significantly longer median length of hospital stay (25 [13.7-32.1] vs 15.2 [8-22.1] days, p = 0.01) and higher median Malnutrition Screening Test scores (2 [0-3] vs 0 [0-2], p = 0.03) than the low-risk group. Patients with foot disease were most likely to see a podiatrist (p < 0.001).ConclusionFoot disease, foot disease risk factors and inappropriate footwear are common in hospitalized older adults, however podiatry assessment and intervention is mostly limited to patients with foot disease. Addition of routine podiatry assessment to the multidisciplinary CGA team should be considered. Examination for arterial disease and risk of malnutrition may be useful to identify at risk patients for podiatry review.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate geriatric education programs for emergency department (ED) professionals based on: content and teaching methods and learning outcome effects and factors promoting or hindering program implementation.DesignSystematic review.SettingED.ParticipantsPhysicians, nurses, and medical residents working in the ED.Methods and measurementFive major biomedical databases were searched for (quasi) experimental studies, published between 1990 and April 2018, evaluating geriatric education programs for ED professionals. Data were synthesized around study quality, learning participants, teaching content and methods, and Kirkpatrick learning outcomes.ResultsNine before-after studies were included. Learners were mostly ED residents and, to a smaller extent, ED nurses and physicians. Study quality was moderate, with the lowest scores on sampling and instrument validity. Programs varied from a 1-day workshop to a 2-year curriculum, mostly combining didactic lectures with active and experiential learning formats. Topics commonly addressed included managing: geriatric syndromes, trauma and falls, medication, atypical presentations, and care transitions. Statistically significant improvements were mostly found in learners' knowledge acquisition (six studies). Significant improvements were also found in single studies on: self-reported geriatric screening, documentation of geriatric care, and appropriate urinary catheter placement. Factors promoting program implementation included: solving competing educational demands and busy work schedules, embedding the program in preexisting curricula, and close collaboration between emergency and geriatric medicine faculties.ConclusionsVarious geriatric education programs improve the geriatric knowledge of ED professionals and seem to positively impact their clinical practice. However, more program evaluations with larger study samples, and use of valid and reliable outcome measures, are needed to provide robust evidence on the effectiveness of such programs. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1-8, 2019. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2402-2409, 2019.

Dataset Information

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in the emergency department.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets