Dataset Information

Effectiveness of acute geriatric unit care on functional decline and process outcomes among older adults admitted to hospital with acute medical complaints: a protocol for a systematic review

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Older adults are clinically heterogeneous and are at increased risk of adverse outcomes during hospitalisation due to the presence of multiple comorbid conditions and reduced homoeostatic reserves. Acute geriatric units (AGUs) are units designed with their own physical location and structure, which provide care to older adults during the acute phase of illness and are underpinned by an interdisciplinary comprehensive geriatric assessment model of care. This review aims to update and synthesise the totality of evidence related to the effectiveness of AGU care on clinical and process outcomes among older adults admitted to hospital with acute medical complaints.

Design

Updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Methods and analysis

MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library and Embase electronic databases will be systematically searched from 2008 to February 2021. Trials with a randomised design that deliver an AGU intervention to older adults admitted to hospital for acute medical complaints will be included. The primary outcome measure will be functional decline at discharge from hospital and at follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include length of stay, cost of index admission, incidence of unscheduled hospital readmission, living at home (the inverse of death or institutionalisation combined; used to describe someone who is in their own home at follow‐up), mortality, cognitive function and patient satisfaction with index admission. Title and abstract screening of studies for full-text extraction will be conducted independently by two authors. The Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool will be used to assess the methodological quality of the included trials. The quality of evidence for outcomes reported will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework. A pooled meta-analysis will be conducted using Review Manager, depending on the uniformity of the data.

Ethics and dissemination

Formal ethical approval is not required as all data collected will be secondary data and will be analysed anonymously. The authors will present the findings of the review to a patient and public involvement stakeholder panel of older adults that has been established at the Ageing Research Centre in the University of Limerick. This will enable the views and opinions of older adults to be integrated into the discussion section of the paper.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42021237633.

SUBMITTER: O’Shaughnessy I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8552169 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHyperglycemia is common in patients admitted to Italian medical/geriatric units and is associated with a poorer outcome. We tested the significance of diabetes and stress-induced hyperglycemia in clinical outcome.Materials and methodsThree hundred seventy-eight consecutive patients with hyperglycemia at entry (≥ 126 mg/dl) (206 without known diabetes) were included, with a wide range of underlying diseases requiring hospital admission and independent of the presence of diabetes. Relative hyperglycemia was calculated as admission glucose divided by average glucose, estimated based of glycosylated hemoglobin. Values ≥ 1.20 were considered indicative of stress hyperglycemia (SHR). The association of SHR with outcome variables (all-cause complications, infections, non-infectious events, deaths) was tested by logistic regression analysis, adjusted for sex, BMI, age-adjusted comorbidities (Charlson index) and known diabetes.ResultsDuring hospital stay, one or more events were registered in 96 patients (25.4%); 44 patients died in hospital, and fatality rate was borderline higher in patients without diabetes (14.6% vs. 8.1% in diabetes; P = 0.052) and nearly three times higher in patients with stress hyperglycemia (15.0%) vs. those with SHR < 1.2 (P = 0.005). Stress hyperglycemia-more common in the absence of diabetes (71% vs. 58%)-and age were the only independent prognostic factors for death. At multivariable analysis, the risks of death (OR 4.31, 95% CI 1.25-14.81), of all complications (OR 5.90, 95% CI 2.22-15.71) and of newly developed systemic infections (OR 5.67, 95% CI 1.61-19.92) were associated with stress hyperglycemia in subjects without diabetes, as was the risk in non-insulin-treated cases (OR 4.02, 95% CI 1.16-13.92; OR 5.47, 95% CI 2.21-13.52; OR 5.15, 95% CI 1.70-15.62, respectively).ConclusionThe study confirms the prognostic value of stress-related hyperglycemia in patients requiring hospital admission to a geriatric/medical unit for a variety of acute medical conditions, contributing to adverse outcomes not limited to events commonly associated with hyperglycemia (e.g., infections).

Project description:Introduction Early supported discharge (ESD) aims to link acute and community care, allowing hospital inpatients to return home and continue to receive the necessary input from healthcare professionals that they would otherwise receive in hospital. The concept has been researched extensively in the stroke population, showing reduced length of stay for patients and improved functional outcomes. This systematic review aims to explore the totality of evidence for the use of ESD in an older adult population who have been hospitalised with medical complaints. Methods A systematic review of randomised controlled trials and quasi randomised controlled trials will be carried out in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies will be included if they provide an ESD intervention to older adults admitted to hospital for medical complaints compared with continuing inpatient care. MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and EMBASE databases will be searched. The primary outcome measure will be length of hospital stay, secondary outcomes will include functional abilities, falls, quality of life, carer and patient satisfaction, unplanned emergency department re-presentation, unscheduled hospital readmission, nursing home admission or mortality. Titles and abstracts of studies will be screened independently by two authors. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool will be used independently by two reviewers to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. GRADE will be used to assess the quality of the body of evidence. A pooled meta-analysis will be conducted using RevMan software V.5.4.1, depending on the uniformity of the data. Ethics and dissemination The authors will present the findings of the review to a patient and public involvement stakeholder panel of older people that has been established at the Ageing Research Centre in the University of Limerick. Formal ethical approval is not required for the review as all data collected will be secondary data and will be analysed anonymously. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021223112.

Project description:BackgroundImplementing dementia care interventions in an acute hospital poses multiple challenges. To understand factors influencing the implementation, in-depth knowledge about specific facilitators and barriers is necessary. The aim of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to implementing an interprofessional, multicomponent intervention of a specialized unit for persons with cognitive impairment in an acute geriatric hospital.MethodsWe conducted a process evaluation as part of a participatory action research study. For data collection, semi-structured individual interviews with fifteen professionals involved in the implementation of the specialized unit. We further conducted two focus groups with twelve professionals working on other units of the geriatric hospital. We performed a qualitative content analysis following Kuckartz's content-structuring analysis scheme.ResultsWe identified the following barriers to implementing the specialized unit: uncontrollable contextual changes (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic), staff turnover in key functions, high fluctuation in the nursing team, traditional work culture, entrenched structures, inflexible and efficiency-oriented processes, monoprofessional attitude, neglect of project-related communication, and fragmentation of interprofessional cooperation. An established culture of interprofessionalism, an interprofessionally composed project group, cooperation with a research partner, as well as the project groups' motivation and competence of managing change facilitated the implementation.ConclusionsThe implementation faced numerous barriers that can be described using the key constructs of the i-PARIHS framework: context, recipients, innovation, and facilitation. Overcoming these barriers requires an organizational development approach, extended project duration and increased process orientation. Furthermore, strategically planned, precise and ongoing communication towards all persons involved seems crucial. Differences between the work cultures of the professions involved deserve particular attention with regard to project-related roles and processes.

Project description:BackgroundPrognostic information at the time of hospital discharge can help guide goals-of-care discussions for future care. We sought to assess the association between the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), which may highlight patients' risk of adverse outcomes at the time of hospital discharge, and in-hospital death among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) within 12 months of a previous hospital discharge.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study that included patients aged 75 years or older admitted at least twice over a 12-month period to the general medicine service at 7 academic centres and large community-based teaching hospitals in Toronto and Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, from Apr. 1, 2010, to Dec. 31, 2019. The HFRS (categorized as low, moderate or high frailty risk) was calculated at the time of discharge from the first hospital admission. Outcomes included ICU admission and death during the second hospital admission.ResultsThe cohort included 22 178 patients, of whom 1767 (8.0%) were categorized as having high frailty risk, 9464 (42.7%) as having moderate frailty risk, and 10 947 (49.4%) as having low frailty risk. One hundred patients (5.7%) with high frailty risk were admitted to the ICU, compared to 566 (6.0%) of those with moderate risk and 790 (7.2%) of those with low risk. After adjustment for age, sex, hospital, day of admission, time of admission and Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, the odds of ICU admission were not significantly different for patients with high (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 1.23) or moderate (adjusted OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.09) frailty risk compared to those with low frailty risk. Among patients admitted to the ICU, 75 (75.0%) of those with high frailty risk died, compared to 317 (56.0%) of those with moderate risk and 416 (52.7%) of those with low risk. After multivariable adjustment, the risk of death after ICU admission was higher for patients with high frailty risk than for those with low frailty risk (adjusted OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.77 to 4.77).InterpretationAmong patients readmitted to hospital within 12 months, patients with high frailty risk were similarly likely as those with lower frailty risk to be admitted to the ICU but were more likely to die if admitted to ICU. The HFRS at hospital discharge can inform prognosis, which can help guide discussions for preferences for ICU care during future hospital stays.