Dataset Information

Is Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Admission Avoidance Hospital at Home an Alternative to Hospital Admission for Older Persons? : A Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Delivering hospital-level care with comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in the home is one approach to deal with the increased demand for bed-based hospital care, but clinical effectiveness is uncertain.

Objective

To assess the clinical effectiveness of admission avoidance hospital at home (HAH) with CGA for older persons.

Design

Multisite randomized trial. (ISRCTN registry number: ISRCTN60477865).

Setting

9 hospital and community sites in the United Kingdom.

Patients

1055 older persons who were medically unwell, were physiologically stable, and were referred for a hospital admission.

Intervention

Admission avoidance HAH with CGA versus hospital admission with CGA when available using 2:1 randomization.

Measurements

The primary outcome of living at home was measured at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were new admission to long-term residential care, death, health status, delirium, and patient satisfaction.

Results

Participants had a mean age of 83.3 years (SD, 7.0). At 6-month follow-up, 528 of 672 (78.6%) participants in the CGA HAH group versus 247 of 328 (75.3%) participants in the hospital group were living at home (relative risk [RR], 1.05 [95% CI, 0.95 to 1.15]; P = 0.36); 114 of 673 (16.9%) versus 58 of 328 (17.7%) had died (RR, 0.98 [CI, 0.65 to 1.47]; P = 0.92); and 37 of 646 (5.7%) versus 27 of 311 (8.7%) were in long-term residential care (RR, 0.58 [CI, 0.45 to 0.76]; P < 0.001).

Limitation

The findings are most applicable to older persons referred from a hospital short-stay acute medical assessment unit; episodes of delirium may have been undetected.

Conclusion

Admission avoidance HAH with CGA led to similar outcomes as hospital admission in the proportion of older persons living at home as well as a decrease in admissions to long-term residential care at 6 months. This type of service can provide an alternative to hospitalization for selected older persons.

Primary funding source

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme (12/209/66).

SUBMITTER: Shepperd S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7612132 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of comprehensive geriatric assessment in hospital for older adults admitted as an emergency.Search strategyWe searched the EPOC Register, Cochrane's Controlled Trials Register, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AARP Ageline, and handsearched high yield journals.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials of comprehensive geriatric assessment (whether by mobile teams or in designated wards) compared with usual care. Comprehensive geriatric assessment is a multidimensional interdisciplinary diagnostic process used to determine the medical, psychological, and functional capabilities of a frail elderly person to develop a coordinated and integrated plan for treatment and long term follow-up.Data collection and analysisThree independent reviewers assessed eligibility and trial quality and extracted published data. Two additional reviewers moderated.ResultsTwenty two trials evaluating 10,315 participants in six countries were identified. For the primary outcome "living at home," patients who underwent comprehensive geriatric assessment were more likely to be alive and in their own homes at the end of scheduled follow-up (odds ratio 1.16 (95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.28; P = 0.003; number needed to treat 33) at a median follow-up of 12 months versus 1.25 (1.11 to 1.42; P < 0.001; number needed to treat 17) at a median follow-up of six months) compared with patients who received general medical care. In addition, patients were less likely to be living in residential care (0.78, 0.69 to 0.88; P < 0.001). Subgroup interaction suggested differences between the subgroups "wards" and "teams" in favour of wards. Patients were also less likely to die or experience deterioration (0.76, 0.64 to 0.90; P = 0.001) and were more likely to experience improved cognition (standardised mean difference 0.08, 0.01 to 0.15; P = 0.02) in the comprehensive geriatric assessment group.ConclusionsComprehensive geriatric assessment increases patients' likelihood of being alive and in their own homes after an emergency admission to hospital. This seems to be especially true for trials of wards designated for comprehensive geriatric assessment and is associated with a potential cost reduction compared with general medical care.

Project description:In many integrated care programs, a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is conducted to identify older people's problems and care needs. Different ways for conducting a CGA are in place. However, it is still unclear which CGA instruments and procedures for conducting them are used in integrated care programs, and what distinguishes them from each other. Furthermore, it is yet unknown how and to what extent CGAs, as a component of integrated care programs, actually reflect the main principles of integrated care, being comprehensiveness, multidisciplinarity and person-centredness. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to: (a) describe and compare different CGA instruments and procedures conducted within integrated care programs for older people living at home, and (b) describe how the principles of integrated care were applied in these CGAs. A scoping review of the scientific literature on CGAs in the context of integrated care was conducted for the period 2006-2018. Data were extracted on main characteristics of the identified CGA instruments and procedures, and on how principles of integrated care were applied in these CGAs. Twenty-seven integrated care programs were included in this study, of which most were implemented in the Netherlands and the United States. Twenty-one different CGAs were identified, of which the EASYcare instrument, RAI-HC/RAI-CHA and GRACE tool were used in multiple programs. The majority of CGAs seemed to reflect comprehensiveness, multidisciplinarity and person-centredness, although the way and extent to which principles of integrated care were incorporated differed between the CGAs. This study highlights the high variability of CGA instruments and procedures used in integrated care programs. This overview of available CGAs and their characteristics may promote (inter-)national exchange of CGAs, which could enable researchers and professionals in choosing from the wide range of existing CGAs, thereby preventing them from unnecessarily reinventing the wheel.

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.