126
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of comprehensive geriatric assessment in hospital for older adults admitted as an emergency.

          Search strategy We 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 criteria Randomised 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 analysis Three independent reviewers assessed eligibility and trial quality and extracted published data. Two additional reviewers moderated.

          Results Twenty 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.

          Conclusions Comprehensive 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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Effectiveness of acute geriatric units on functional decline, living at home, and case fatality among older patients admitted to hospital for acute medical disorders: meta-analysis

          Objective To assess the effectiveness of acute geriatric units compared with conventional care units in adults aged 65 or more admitted to hospital for acute medical disorders. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to 31 August 2008, and references from published literature. Review methods Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, and case-control studies were included. Exclusions were studies based on administrative databases, those that assessed care for a single disorder, those that evaluated acute and subacute care units, and those in which patients were admitted to the acute geriatric unit after three or more days of being admitted to hospital. Two investigators independently selected the studies and extracted the data. Results 11 studies were included of which five were randomised trials, four non-randomised trials, and two case-control studies. The randomised trials showed that compared with older people admitted to conventional care units those admitted to acute geriatric units had a lower risk of functional decline at discharge (combined odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 0.99) and were more likely to live at home after discharge (1.30, 1.11 to 1.52), with no differences in case fatality (0.83, 0.60 to 1.14). The global analysis of all studies, including non-randomised trials, showed similar results. Conclusions Care of people aged 65 or more with acute medical disorders in acute geriatric units produces a functional benefit compared with conventional hospital care, and increases the likelihood of living at home after discharge.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A controlled trial of inpatient and outpatient geriatric evaluation and management.

            Over the past 20 years, both inpatient units and outpatient clinics have developed programs for geriatric evaluation and management. However, the effects of these interventions on survival and functional status remain uncertain. We conducted a randomized trial involving frail patients 65 years of age or older who were hospitalized at 11 Veterans Affairs medical centers. After their condition had been stabilized, patients were randomly assigned, according to a two-by-two factorial design, to receive either care in an inpatient geriatric unit or usual inpatient care, followed by either care at an outpatient geriatric clinic or usual outpatient care. The interventions involved teams that provided geriatric assessment and management according to Veterans Affairs standards and published guidelines. The primary outcomes were survival and health-related quality of life, measured with the use of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-36), one year after randomization. Secondary outcomes were the ability to perform activities of daily living, physical performance, utilization of health services, and costs. A total of 1388 patients were enrolled and followed. Neither the inpatient nor the outpatient intervention had a significant effect on mortality (21 percent at one year overall), nor were there any synergistic effects between the two interventions. At discharge, patients assigned to the inpatient geriatric units had significantly greater improvements in the scores for four of the eight SF-36 subscales, activities of daily living, and physical performance than did those assigned to usual inpatient care. At one year, patients assigned to the outpatient geriatric clinics had better scores on the SF-36 mental health subscale, even after adjustment for the score at discharge, than those assigned to usual outpatient care. Total costs at one year were similar for the intervention and usual-care groups. In this controlled trial, care provided in inpatient geriatric units and outpatient geriatric clinics had no significant effects on survival. There were significant reductions in functional decline with inpatient geriatric evaluation and management and improvements in mental health with outpatient geriatric evaluation and management, with no increase in costs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older hospital patients.

              In-patient comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) may reduce short-term mortality, increase the chances of living at home at 1 year and improve physical and cognitive function. We systematically reviewed the literature and found 20 randomized controlled trials (10 427 participants) of in-patient CGA for a mixed elderly population. This includes seven more recent randomized controlled trials that update a previous review. Newer data confirm the benefit of in-patient CGA, increasing the chance of patients living at home in the long term. Overall, for every 100 patients undergoing CGA, three more will be alive and in their own homes compared with usual care [95% confidence interval (CI) 1-6]. Most of the benefit was seen for ward-based management units (four patients per 100 treated, 95% CI 1-7) with little contribution from team-based care (no patients per 100, 95% CI -4 to +5). However, CGA does not reduce long-term mortality. This evidence should inform future service developments.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: consultant geriatrician and honorary senior clinical lecturer
                Role: consultant geriatrician
                Role: consultant geriatrician
                Role: associate professor of gerontology
                Role: professor of stroke care
                Journal
                BMJ
                bmj
                BMJ : British Medical Journal
                BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
                0959-8138
                1468-5833
                2011
                2011
                27 October 2011
                : 343
                : d6553
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Medicine for the Elderly, Monklands Hospital, Airdrie, North Lanarkshire, Scotland, UK
                [2 ]Medicine for the Elderly, Wishaw General Hospital, Wishaw, North Lanarkshire
                [3 ]Mercer’s Institute for Research on Ageing, St James’ Hospital, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
                [4 ]Department of Medical Gerontology, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin
                [5 ]Academic Section of Geriatric Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland
                Author notes
                Article
                ellg874289
                10.1136/bmj.d6553
                3203013
                22034146
                1ee01165-f399-4894-b424-90b15ed40876
                © Ellis et al 2011

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.

                History
                : 19 September 2011
                Categories
                Research
                Clinical Trials (Epidemiology)
                Internet

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article