Search

Background: Healthcare outcome goals are central to person-centred acute care, however evidence among older people is scarce. Older people who are living with frailty have distinct requirements for healthcare delivery and have distinct risk for adverse outcomes from healthcare. There is insufficient evidence for whether those living with frailty also have distinct healthcare outcome goals. This study explored the nature of acute care outcome goals in people living with frailty.Methods: Healthcare outcome goals were explored using semi-structured patient interviews. Participants aged over 65 with Clinical Frailty Score 5-8 (mild to very severe frailty) were recruited during their first 72 hours in a UK hospital. Purposive, maximum variation sampling was guided by lay partners from a Patient and Public Involvement Forum specialising in ageing-related research. Qualitative analysis used a blended approach based on framework and constant comparative methodologies for the identification of themes. Findings were validated through triangulation with participant, lay partner, and technical expert review.Results: The 22 participants were aged 71 to 98 and had mild to very severe frailty. One quarter were living with dementia. Most participants had reflected on their situation and considered their outcome goals. Theme categories (and corresponding sub-categories) were 'Autonomy' (information, control, and security) and 'Functioning' (physical, psychosocial, and relief). A novel 'security' theme was identified, whereby participants sought to feel safe in their usual living place and with their health problems. Those living with milder frailty were concerned to maintain ability to support loved ones, while those living with most severe frailty were concerned about burdening others.Conclusions: Outcome goals for acute care among older participants living with frailty were influenced by the insecurity of their situation and fear of deterioration. Patients may be supported to feel safe and in control through appropriate information provision and functional support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypertension is a common condition in older people, but is often one of many conditions, particularly in frail older people, and so is rarely managed in isolation in the real world--which belies the bulk of the evidence upon which is treatment decisions are often based. In this article, we discuss the issues of ageing, including frailty and dementia, and their impact upon blood pressure management. We examine the evidence base for managing hypertension in older people, and explore some therapeutic ideas that might influence treatment decisions and strategies, including shared decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: identifying the most at risk older people in Emergency Departments (EDs) may help guide clinical practice, and service improvement in emergency care, but little is known about how to implement such tools in practice. Methods: consensus building was used to determine the desirable characteristics of a risk stratification process, including focus groups and literature reviewing. Candidate tools were tested using clinical vignettes in semi-structured interviews with a range of clinicians working in one large ED, assessing speed of use, ease of use and agreement with clinical judgement. The primary outcome was the likelihood of future use of a given frailty tool. Results: the ideal tool characteristics included brevity (<1 min), simplicity and multidimensionality; tools selected for testing included the Identification of Seniors At Risk, Clinical Frailty Scale, PRISMA-7 and Silver Code. One hundred and twentyone staff members (43% of the total ED workforce) were recruited from one large ED in the East Midlands. Two hundred and thirty-six individual frailty tool assessments were undertaken using 1 of 10 clinical vignettes; 75% of staff stated that they would use at least one of the tools again, with no significant differences between the individual tools. The median time to complete the tool was around 1 min per patient for all four tools. There were no significant differences in timing, ease of use or agreement with clinical judgement between tools. Discussion: validated risk stratification tools are quick, simple, easy to use and 75% of staff would use the tools again in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: risk-stratifying older people accessing urgent care is a potentially useful first step to ensuring that the most vulnerable are able to access optimal care from the start of the episode. While there are many risk-stratification tools reported in the literature, few have addressed the practical issues of implementation. This review sought evidence about the feasibility of risk stratification for older people with urgent care needs. Methods: medline was searched for papers addressing risk stratification and implementation (feasibility or evaluation or clinician acceptability). All search stages were conducted by two reviewers, and selected papers were graded for quality using the CASP tool for cohort studies. Data were summarised using descriptive statistics only. Results: about 1872 titles of potential interest were identified, of which 1827 were excluded on title/abstract review, and a further 43 after full-text review, leaving four papers for analysis. These papers described nine tools, which took between 1 and 10 minutes to complete for most participants. No more than 52% of potentially eligible older people were actually screened using any of the tools. Little detail was reported on the clinical acceptability of the tools tested. Discussion: the existing literature indicates that commonly used risk-stratification tools are relatively quick to use, but do not cover much more than 50% of the potential population eligible for screening in practice. Additional work is required to appreciate how tools are likely to be used, by whom, and when in order to ensure that they are acceptable to urgent care teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optimal management of hypertension in people with dementia is uncertain. This review explores if people with dementia experience greater adverse effects from antihypertensive medications, if cognitive function is protected or worsened by controlling blood pressure (BP) and if there are subgroups of people with dementia for whom antihypertensive therapy is more likely to be harmful. Robust evidence is scant, trials of antihypertensive medications have generally excluded those with dementia. Observational data show changes in risk association over the life course, with high BP being a risk factor for cognitive decline in mid-life, while low BP is predictive in later life. It is therefore possible that excessive BP lowering in older people with dementia might harm cognition. From the existing literature, there is no direct evidence of benefit or harm from treating hypertension in people with dementia. So what practical steps can the clinician take? Assess capacity, establish patient preferences when making treatment decisions, use ambulatory monitoring to thoroughly assess BP, individualise and consider deprescribing where side effects (e.g. hypotension) outweigh the benefits. Future research might include pragmatic randomised trials of targeted deprescribing, which include patient-centred outcome measures to help support decision-making and studies to address mechanistic uncertainties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) may be helpful for the management of hypertension, but little is known about its tolerability in people with dementia. Objective: to review the published evidence to determine the tolerability of ABPM in people with dementia. Methods: English language search conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE, using Ambulatory blood pressure' AND 'Dementia' (and associated synonyms) from 1996 to March 2015. Inclusion criteria: people diagnosed with dementia AND in whom blood pressure was measured using ABPM. The initial search was undertaken using title and abstract reviews, with selected papers being agreed for inclusion by two reviewers. Potentially eligible papers were assessed, and high-quality papers were retained. Two reviewers agreed the abstracted data for analysis. Meta-analysis was used to combine results across studies. Results: of the 221 screened abstracts, 13 studies (6%) met inclusion criteria, 5 had sufficient data and were of sufficient quality, involving 461 participants, most of whom had mild--moderate dementia. 77.7% (95% CI 62.2-93.2%) were able to tolerate ABPM; agreement with office BP was moderate to weak (two studies only--coefficients 0.3-0.38 for systolic blood pressure and 0.11-0.32 for diastolic blood pressure). One study compared home BP monitoring by a relative or ambulatory BP monitoring with office BP measures and found high agreement (ϗ 0.81). The little available evidence suggested increased levels of dementia being associated with reduced tolerability. Conclusions: ABPM is well tolerated in people with mild-moderate dementia and provides some additional information over and above office BP alone. However, few studies have addressed ABPM in people with more severe dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we outline the relationship between the need to put existing applied health research knowledge into practice (the 'know-do gap') and the need to improve the evidence base (the 'know gap') with respect to the healthcare process used for older people with frailty known as comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). We explore the reasons for the know-do gap and the principles of how these barriers to implementation might be overcome. We explore how these principles should affect the conduct of applied health research to close the know gap. We propose that impaired flow of knowledge is an important contributory factor in the failure to implement evidence-based practice in CGA; this could be addressed through specific knowledge mobilisation techniques. We describe that implementation failures are also produced by an inadequate evidence base that requires the co-production of research, addressing not only effectiveness but also the feasibility and acceptability of new services, the educational needs of practitioners, the organisational requirements of services, and the contribution made by policy. Only by tackling these issues in concert and appropriate proportion, will the know and know-do gaps for CGA be closed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: the ageing demographic means that increasing numbers of older people will be attending emergency departments (EDs). Little previous research has focused on the needs of older people in ED and there have been no evaluations of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) embedded within the ED setting.Methods: a pre-post cohort study of the impact of embedding CGA within a large ED in the East Midlands, UK. The primary outcome was admission avoidance from the ED, with readmissions, length of stay and bed-day use as secondary outcomes.Results: attendances to ED increased in older people over the study period, whereas the ED conversion rate fell from 69.6 to 61.2% in people aged 85+, and readmission rates in this group fell from 26.0% at 90 days to 19.9%. In-patient bed-day use increased slightly, as did the mean length of stay.Discussion: it is possible to embed CGA within EDs, which is associated with improvements in operational outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: older people are at an increased risk of adverse outcomes following attendance at acute hospitals. Screening tools may help identify those most at risk. The objective of this study was to compare the predictive properties of five frailty-rating scales.Method: this was a secondary analysis of a cohort study involving participants aged 70 years and above attending two acute medical units in the East Midlands, UK. Participants were classified at baseline as frail or non-frail using five different frailty-rating scales. The ability of each scale to predict outcomes at 90 days (mortality, readmissions, institutionalisation, functional decline and a composite adverse outcome) was assessed using area under a receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC).Results: six hundred and sixty-seven participants were studied. Frail participants according to all scales were associated with a significant increased risk of mortality [relative risk (RR) range 1.6–3.1], readmission (RR range 1.1–1.6), functional decline (RR range 1.2–2.1) and the composite adverse outcome (RR range 1.2–1.6). However, the predictive properties of the frailty-rating scales were poor, at best, for all outcomes assessed (AUC ranging from 0.44 to 0.69).Conclusion: frailty-rating scales alone are of limited use in risk stratifying older people being discharged from acute medical units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: many frail older people who attend acute hospital settings and who are discharged home within short periods (up to 72 h) have poor outcomes. This review assessed the role of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) for such people.Methods: standard bibliographic databases were searched for high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CGA in this setting. When appropriate, intervention effects were presented as rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals.Results: five trials of sufficient quality were included. There was no clear evidence of benefit for CGA interventions in this population in terms of mortality [RR 0.92 (95% CI 0.55–1.52)] or readmissions [RR 0.95 (95% CI 0.83–1.08)] or for subsequent institutionalisation, functional ability, quality-of-life or cognition.Conclusions: there is no clear evidence of benefit for CGA interventions in frail older people being discharged from emergency departments or acute medical units. However, few such trials have been carried out and their overall quality was poor. Further well designed trials are justified. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]