Search

Background Developing age-friendly communities is a significant global policy issue. The WHO (2007) age-friendly cities and communities initiative has had a significant influence on the development of Ireland's Age-Friendly Programme. With research on such programmes still at an early stage, this paper critically examines the utilisation of the WHO age-friendly planning framework in an Irish context. It explores older adults' experience of living in two towns in an 'age-friendly' county and, in parallel, examines stakeholders' perspectives on the development of the county's age-friendly programme. This multi-perspectival approach facilitates an assessment of how the age-friendly county programme addresses older residents' needs, and illustrates how the WHO conceptual and planning framework has worked in an Irish context. Methods The paper reports on a study which employed a mixed-method, qualitative case-study research design, using a constructivist grounded theory approach to explore the lived experience of older adults, and a case-study framework for the stakeholder perspective. Results The research identifies salient social and cultural dimensions of the day-to-day lived experience of older people which, although they impact on the age-friendliness of the places in which they live, are neglected in the WHO framework. It also identifies a unique combination of economic, political, cultural, and organisational factors which have impacted on age-friendly programme development in Ireland. Conclusion In critically analysing use of the WHO age-friendly model, the paper suggests ways in which the model can be modified to better accommodate the diverse experience of older adults not only in Ireland, but also in other geographic and cultural contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The transition of older persons between care settings is recognised as a particularly critical and vulnerable period (Renom-Guiteras et al. 2014). Appropriate documentation and processes are key in assisting the provision of quality, safe, person-centred care when transferring older persons from residential to acute care settings. This paper reports on the design phase of a national transfer document for older persons. The objective was to inform the development of a draft national transfer document. Methods Development consisted of two phases 1) an integrative review and 2) focus group interviews with stakeholders. The review was guided by Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) integrative review framework. Data from studies using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies were extracted and thematically analysed. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, focus group interviews (n=8) were conducted with a convenience sample of key stakeholders (n=68) to establish their perspectives regarding transfer documents. Data were analysed using content analysis. Results from both phases were integrated to guide the development of the draft document. A multidisciplinary panel of experts in older persons care, reviewed and provided feedback on the draft transfer document. Results Within the review, thirty identified papers focused on transfer documentation between residential and acute care. Results indicated that using a standardised document can potentiate the delivery and acceptance of relevant person-centred information between all parties when transferring an older person between residential and acute care settings. Qualitative interview findings highlighted important aspects for consideration regarding the layout, content and format of future transfer documentation. Following collaboration with the expert panel the transfer document was developed for piloting. Conclusion Consistency and clarity of information is key for a successful transfer of older persons from residential to acute settings. Information needs to be evidence-based, current, and subject to response and change in accordance with best available international practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The continuing evolution of adult safeguarding legislation, policy and practice in relation to the abuse of vulnerable adults reflects a growing awareness of the nature and extent of such abuse in Ireland. The Adult Safeguarding Bill, 2017 represents a progressive step in safeguarding older people and vulnerable adults. The intention of the Bill is to put in place additional protections for adults, in particular, for those who may be unable to protect themselves, such as older people or those lacking capacity. Part 3 provides for mandatory reporting by specified/named persons/professionals. This paper sets out to critically analyse the concept of mandatory reporting within adult safeguarding using international comparators as case studies. Methods A rapid realist review of adult safeguarding reporting typologies and systems in five key jurisdictions: Australia, Canada, England, Northern Ireland and Scotland, were explored to answer the question: ' what works, for whom and in what circumstances ?' [1] Results Jurisdictions differ as to who the mandated reporters are, the scope and powers of mandatory reporting, and the types of abuse subject to reporting. Of significance is that the debate on mandatory reporting has increasingly focused on institutional settings, rather than more broadly across services. Key concepts identified are those of protection, empowerment and proportionality. Adult safeguarding legislation must therefore ensure that interventionist and compulsory measures to protect do not excessively restrict the rights of the individual. Conclusion Mandatory reporting may offer professionals increased powers to prevent and reduce the abuse of adults and older people, but this could also change the dynamic of relationships within families, and between families and professionals. Ultimately, the success of any legal approach will rest with professional judgment in balancing autonomy with protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Physical activity (PA) has multiple important benefits for older adults, but many do not undertake the recommended amount. This systematic review examined the quantitative literature detailing barriers and motivators to PA in older adults: a concurrent qualitative review is underway. Previous reviews investigated younger age groups or specific diseases. Method We included adults ≥70 years, observational studies and baseline data for randomised controlled trials (RCTs); we excluded studies of specific disease groups, care home residents, and rates of cognitive impairment above population norms. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO on 25th February 2020. We assessed risk-of-bias using ROBANS. We undertook a narrative review; meta-analysis was not possible. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021160503). Results We identified 35 papers (24 cross-sectional studies, eight prospective cohort studies, two studies of baseline data from RCTs and one mixed method study); n = 26,264 subjects, median age 77.7 years (range 70–101) and median percentage female 62.1% (range 0–100). Quality assessment identified low risk-of-bias overall, except two studies were identified as having a high risk-of-bias for one section (confounding variables). The most cited barriers were physical health (N = 14 studies), environmental factors (N = 12), fear of falls (N = 7) and lack of interest (N = 4). Other barriers identified were lack of company (N = 1) and urine leakage (in women) (N = 1). Key motivating factors included social aspects of PA (N = 8), intrinsic/psychological (e.g. self-determination, future orientation) (N = 8), health (e.g. doctor's advice) (N = 7) and environmental (e.g. nearby green space) (N = 4). Discussion This review identified key barriers and motivators to PA in older adults. There is a lack of evidence for the oldest old. These findings should be used to create trials of suitable interventions which enable older adults to take up and maintain recommended levels of PA. The wide range of factors we identified indicates an individualised approach may be best. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Anticoagulation of elderly patients with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) and falls remains a domain of contention amongst clinicians. There is limited evidence to guide long-term anticoagulation decision in such patients. We performed a systematic-review and meta-analysis to guide anticoagulation decision. Methods We conducted a prospectively registered systematic-review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42021228661). Studies investigating patients >65 years of age anticoagulated for AF at risk of falls were included. Outcomes included were stroke/systemic embolism (SSE), CNS bleeds, major non-CNS bleeds, and mortality. CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, DARE, Web of science and Scopus were searched. Two authors performed paper inclusion/exclusion, data extraction, risk of bias and GRADE assessment. Data was pooled quantitatively using random-effects models and expressed as Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CI). Results Nine studies were included and five were combined quantitatively. Studies had low to moderate risk of bias. Anticoagulated fallers were at higher risk of SSE (OR = 1.73, 95%CI:1.21–2.47, p = 0.003), CNS bleeds (OR = 1.67, 95%CI:1.25–2.23, p < 0.001), major bleeds (OR = 1.87, 95%CI:1.66–2.11, p < 0.001) and mortality (OR = 1.96, 95%CI:1.71–2.25, p < 0.001) compared to anticoagulated non-fallers. Anticoagulated fallers were at higher risk of major bleeds compared to fallers not on anticoagulation (OR = 1.69, 95%CI:1.03–2.77, p = 0.04). However, there was no statistically significant difference in SSE, CNS bleeds or mortality. In fallers, Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) have lower risk of CNS bleeds (OR = 0.19, 95%CI:0.09–0.041, p < 0.001) and major bleeds (OR = 0.78, 95%CI:0.60–1.01, p = 0.06) compared to warfarin. There was no statistically significant difference in SSE or mortality between the anticoagulants. Conclusion: (s) Falling on anticoagulation is associated with increased risk of complications. However, only risk of major non-CNS bleeds increases when anticoagulating fallers. In fallers, DOACs appear safer than warfarin for bleeding complications. There remains paucity of evidence about anticoagulation in fallers (GRADE certainty = very low—moderate). Further evidence is needed to help clinicians and patients regarding anticoagulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Local Problem: A multidisciplinary team comprising a consultant geriatrician and nurse consultant reviews all patients aged ≥70 years who have an emergency laparotomy at Royal Derby Hospital. Anecdotally there is a high incidence of delirium but retrospective casenote audit found only 19% of patients admitted for emergency laparotomy July 2018–July 2019 were identified as having delirium by the surgical team. Method: A first PDSA cycle showed that the 4AT was feasible for use by healthcare assistants on the surgical assessment unit (SAU). A second PDSA cycle, described here, sought to develop a rationale for implementation of the 4AT as part of surgical assessment by comparing true prevalence of delirium using 4AT, with the prevalence detected using methods currently mandated by our hospital. All patients aged ≥65 years admitted as part of the surgical pathway had 4AT completed by a member of our improvement team on admission, with daily review until discharge. Results: Data were collected for 111 consecutive emergency surgical admissions. Mean (SD) age was 78.3 (7.7) years. Of these, 1 and 3 were categorised as having delirium and dementia respectively using existing hospital screening tools. Using 4AT, 36 (32%) of patients were identified as having delirium. When supplemented by clinical history, true prevalence was 40 (36%). Average (SD) length of stay was 7 (5.6) days for the whole cohort, 10 (6.5) and 5.3 (4.3) days for those with and without delirium respectively. Conclusions: 4AT was 92% sensitive for delirium in our cohort. The existing hospital tool was underutilised to the point of being useless. Patients with delirium had a longer length of stay. We have developed a modified 4AT paper tool and training materials and are now piloting routine use in SAU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Older women are increasingly undergoing surgery for gynaecological malignancies. Although survival data is available other outcomes such as functional recovery are less well described. However older people are both more vulnerable to changes in function and often prioritise function over survival. There is limited published research examining function outside of context of sexual or urodynamic function following gynaeoncology surgery but a large body or research exists examining health-related quality of life (HrQOL) both as a pre-operative risk factor for survival and as a post-treatment outcome measure in its own right. HRQOL tools may report on physical function as a subcomponent within composite tools. This systematic review and narrative synthesis describes functional recovery after gynaeoncology surgery with respect to baseline characteristics which - if identified – could enable pre- or post-operative risk reduction. Methods: Systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and Cochrane Library between 1974-2018. Two reviewers independently reviewed abstracts/papers for inclusion against the following criteria: • Mean/median age >60 • Gynaeoncological treatment includes surgery (RCTs, observational or mixed methods studies). • Any measure of functional ability as defined by WHOICF classification section D1–D7 inclusive, D855, D860-79 and D9 using validated tool. • Minimum pre-operative and one post-operative measure. Results analysed and presented using narrative synthesis. Results: Sixteen studies identified (7 Endometrial, 2 Ovarian, 2 Vulval, 6 mixed cancer types). 1/16 used a standalone functional assessment tool, 15/16 used Health-Related Quality of Life tools (EORTC QLQ C30 (10), FACT-G (3), SF-36 (3)) comprising items describing function. More studies showed full recovery to baseline (n=11) than incomplete recovery (n=5 including 2 reporting age as a negative association). Recovery was more likely and occurred faster in minimally-invasive surgery. 1 study demonstrated failure to recover baseline functional independence by 12 months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background older people remain underrepresented in clinical trials, and evidence generated in younger populations cannot always be generalized to older patients. Objective to identify key barriers and to discuss solutions to specific issues affecting recruitment and retention of older participants in clinical trials based on experience gained from six current European randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on older people. Methods a multidisciplinary group of experts including representatives of the six RCTs held two networking conferences and compiled lists of potential barriers and solutions. Every item was subsequently allocated points by each study team according to how important it was perceived to be for their RCTs. Results the six RCTs enrolled 7,612 older patients. Key barriers to recruitment were impaired health status, comorbidities and diverse health beliefs including priorities within different cultural systems. All trials had to increase the number of recruitment sites. Other measures felt to be effective included the provision of extra time, communication training for the study staff and a re-design of patient information. Key barriers for retention included the presence of severe comorbidities and the occurrence of adverse events. Long study duration, frequent study visits and difficulties accessing the study site were also mentioned. Solutions felt to be effective included spending more time maintaining close contact with the participants, appropriate measures to show appreciation and reimbursement of travel arrangements. Conclusion recruitment and retention of older patients in trials requires special recognition and a targeted approach. Our results provide scientifically-based practical recommendations for optimizing future studies in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]