Dataset Information

A Simple Bedside Screening Tool for Spasticity Referral.

ABSTRACT: Background and Objectives:Spasticity is common in long-term care facilities; however, this often-disabling condition is largely underdiagnosed in this setting and therefore left untreated. This study aimed to test the ability of a three-question flowchart used at the bedside by primary care providers in the long-term care setting to identify residents in need of referral to a specialist for spasticity consultation. Methods:All residents of a single long-term care facility were approached for participation in this cross-sectional, observational study. Spasticity diagnostic evaluations by a movement disorders specialist neurologist (reference standard) were compared with referral determinations made by two primary care providers [a primary care physician (PCP) and a nurse practitioner (NP)] using the simple flowchart. Results:The analysis included 49 residents (80% male, age 78.2±9.0 years) who were evaluated by the reference standard neurologist and at least one primary care provider. The bedside referral tool demonstrated high sensitivity and moderate specificity when used by the PCP (92% and 78%, respectively; AUC=0.84) and NP (80% and 53%, respectively; AUC=0.67). Conclusion:This simple tool may be useful for primary care providers to identify residents to be referred to a specialist for evaluation and treatment of spasticity. These results warrant further investigation of the potential utility of this screening tool across multiple long-term care facilities and various types of care providers.

SUBMITTER: Hacker ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7234972 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Simple Bedside Screening Tool for Spasticity Referral.

Hacker Mallory L ML Ploucher Shelby S Naik Aaditi G AG Turchan Maxim M Meystedt Jacqueline C JC Harper Kelly K Hedera Peter P Pirtle Claude J CJ Stubblefield Kassandra K Charles David D

Clinical interventions in aging 20200513

<h4>Background and objectives</h4>Spasticity is common in long-term care facilities; however, this often-disabling condition is largely underdiagnosed in this setting and therefore left untreated. This study aimed to test the ability of a three-question flowchart used at the bedside by primary care providers in the long-term care setting to identify residents in need of referral to a specialist for spasticity consultation.<h4>Methods</h4>All residents of a single long-term care facility were app ...[more]

PMID: 32523335

Similar Datasets

Project description:This project was done at specialist cancer hospital in Qatar. At a haematology-oncology inpatient department most patients were not getting access to palliative care unless they were at the very end stages of life. Data collected from 2008-2011 showed significant numbers of patients were dying within one month of their transfer to palliative care. There was no standard measure to identify the prospective palliative care patients. A multidisciplinary team developed a Palliative care referral screening tool based on the National Cancer Care Network guideline. Retrospective medical record review done from January to April 2012 showed a mean of 68% of patients who scored more than five were not consulted, 32% of patients who scored more than seven were not transferred to palliative care and seven percent died without any referral. The team used various kinds of quality planning, analysis and improvement tools in the form of process mapping, value analysis, Fish Bone diagrams, stakeholders' analysis and communication, physician survey, "Pareto's principal" (80 / 20 rule, the law of vital few) and other data collection tools. The palliative care referral process was standardised by preparing and implementing an objective scoring tool based on international best practice. It changed the referral culture and helped manage the psychological barriers of patients, families and caregivers. Extensive orientation and education of all key stakeholders was implemented. Monthly auditing of patient records was carried out. The aim has been achieved, exceeded and sustained, and we reduced the percentage of patients who scored more than five without palliative consultation from a mean of 68% to 16% and those who scored more than seven without palliative care transfer from a mean of thirty two percent to three percent, after four months of the project's implementation. Standardising the referral process and creating an objective referral tool is needed to facilitate safe, collaborative, continuous and patient centered care. Timely referral of cancer patients to palliative care minimises patient and caregiver distress, ensures better quality of life, and provides an appropriate measure for end of life care.

Project description:Background and purposeScreening tests for dementia such as the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment are widely used, but there are drawbacks to their efficient use. There remains a need for a brief and easy method of assessing the activities of daily living (ADL) that can be administered to elderly individuals by healthcare workers. We have therefore developed a new scale named the Simple Observation Checklist for Activities of Daily Living (SOC-ADL).MethodsWe developed the SOC-ADL scale as a team of experts engaged in caring for individuals with dementia. This scale comprises eight items and was designed based on the Korean instrumental activities of daily living (K-IADL) scale and the Barthel activities of daily living scale (Barthel Index). The new scale was validated by enrolling 176 patients with cognitive dysfunction across 6 centers. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were performed. We assessed its concurrent validity by performing comparisons with the Korean-MMSE, Clinical Dementia Rating, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes, K-IADL, and Barthel Index, and its criterion validity by performing comparisons between mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. We also used Cronbach's alpha to assess the interitem reliability. The appropriate cutoff values were determined by analyzing receiver operating characteristic curves, including the areas underneath them.ResultsEFA extracted one factor and CFA revealed that all of the model fits exceeded the minimum acceptable criteria. The SOC-ADL scores were strongly correlated with those of the other tools for dementia and could be used to differentiate MCI from dementia. Cronbach's alpha values indicated that the results were reliable. The optimal cutoff value of the SOC-ADL for discriminating dementia from MCI was 3 points, which provided a sensitivity and specificity of 74.5% and 75.7%, respectively.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that the SOC-ADL is a valid and reliable tool for differentiating dementia from MCI based on an assessment of ADL. This new tool can be used for screening ADL in elderly subjects who have difficulty communicating, and to increase the efficiency of dementia screening at the population level.

Project description:BackgroundThe general paediatricians and primary care physicians sometimes face immense difficulty in referral judgements regarding which infantile hemangiomas (IHs) require referrals and when is the appropriate time to refer IHs for treatment. This resulted in the treatment being delayed beyond IHs' critical timeframe. The Infantile Hemangioma Referral Score (IHReS) has been recently developed, with the aim to solve this problem.ObjectivesThe objective of the present study is to evaluate the reliability of IHReS and to assess the possibility of using this instrument in our country where a similar problem of delaying treatment of IHs is currently existing.MethodsThe present study was a prospective, cross-sectional study. Thirteen selected clinical cases were used to assess the reliability of IHReS among physicians who may have had the chance to deal with patients with IHs. The target physicians across the country were asked to participate in the study via an online platform (Google Forms) to decide whether to refer patients with IHs for treatment or observe. There were 3 steps of assessment: step 1, usual practice evaluation; step 2, using IHReS; step 3, retesting by using IHReS.ResultsSubstantial agreement was observed after using IHReS (step 2) for interrater reliability, with Fleiss' Kappa values of 0.80 and 0.78 among IH experts and non-expert physicians, respectively. Regarding repeatability, in the test-retest assessments, Cohen's Kappa coefficient values revealed almost perfect agreement in intrarater repeatability for both experts and non-expert physicians (1.00).ConclusionIHReS is a simple, easy-to-assess tool for non-expert physicians. The benefit in the increase of interrater agreement was found in both IH experts and non-expert physicians. It has had the reliability to be used in making referral decisions regarding patients with IH for treatment among Thai physicians. Using IHReS can improve clinical outcomes by identifying which patient needs early intervention to minimise the possible complications.

Dataset Information

A Simple Bedside Screening Tool for Spasticity Referral.

Publications

A Simple Bedside Screening Tool for Spasticity Referral.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets