9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      What evidence is there for the identification and management of frail older people in the emergency department? A systematic mapping review

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      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

          Background

          Emergency departments (EDs) are facing unprecedented levels of demand. One of the causes of this increased demand is the ageing population. Older people represent a particular challenge to the ED as those older people who are frail will require management that considers their frailty alongside their presenting complaint. How to identify these older people as frail and how best to manage them in the ED is a major challenge for the health service to address.

          Objectives

          To systematically map interventions to identify frail and high-risk older people in the ED and interventions to manage older people in the ED and to map the outcomes of these interventions and examine whether or not there is any evidence of the impact of these interventions on patient and health service outcomes.

          Design

          A systematic mapping review.

          Setting

          Evidence from developed countries on interventions delivered in the ED.

          Participants

          Frail and high-risk older people and general populations of older people (aged > 65 years).

          Interventions

          Interventions to identify older people who are frail or who are at high risk of adverse outcomes and to manage (frail) older people within the ED.

          Main outcome measures

          Patient outcomes (direct and indirect) and health service outcomes.

          Data sources

          Evidence from 103 peer-reviewed articles and conference abstracts and 17 systematic reviews published from 2005 to 2016.

          Review methods

          A review protocol was drawn up and a systematic database search was undertaken for the years 2005–2016 (using MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Management Information Consortium and PROSPERO). Studies were included according to predefined criteria. Following data extraction, evidence was classified into interventions relating to the identification of frail/high-risk older people in the ED and interventions relating to their management. A narrative synthesis of interventions/outcomes relating to these categories was undertaken. A quality assessment of individual studies was not undertaken; instead, an assessment of the overall evidence base in this area was made.

          Results

          Of the 90 included studies, 32 focused on a frail/high-risk population and 60 focused on an older population. These studies reported on interventions to identify ( n = 57) and manage ( n = 53) older people. The interventions to identify frail and at-risk older people, on admission and at discharge, utilised a number of different tools. There was extensive evidence on these question-based tools, but the evidence was inconclusive and contradictory. Service delivery innovations comprised changes to staffing, infrastructure and care delivery. There was a general trend towards improved outcomes in admissions avoidance, reduced ED reattendance and improved discharge outcomes.

          Limitations

          This review was a systematic mapping review. Some of the methods adopted differed from those used in a standard systematic review. Mapping the evidence base has led to the inclusion of a wide variety of evidence (in terms of study type and reporting quality). No recommendations on the effectiveness of specific interventions have been made as this was outside the scope of the review.

          Conclusions

          A substantial body of evidence on interventions for frail and high-risk older people was identified and mapped.

          Future work

          Future work in this area needs to determine why interventions work and whether or not they are feasible for the NHS and acceptable to patients.

          Study registration

          This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016043260.

          Funding

          The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

          Related collections

          Most cited references136

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Risk factors and screening instruments to predict adverse outcomes for undifferentiated older emergency department patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            A significant proportion of geriatric patients experience suboptimal outcomes following episodes of emergency department (ED) care. Risk stratification screening instruments exist to distinguish vulnerable subsets, but their prognostic accuracy varies. This systematic review quantifies the prognostic accuracy of individual risk factors and ED-validated screening instruments to distinguish patients more or less likely to experience short-term adverse outcomes like unanticipated ED returns, hospital readmissions, functional decline, or death.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reduction of 30-day postdischarge hospital readmission or emergency department (ED) visit rates in high-risk elderly medical patients through delivery of a targeted care bundle.

              Care coordination has shown inconsistent results as a mechanism to reduce hospital readmission and postdischarge emergency department (ED) visit rates. To assess the impact of a supplemental care bundle targeting high-risk elderly inpatients implemented by hospital-based staff compared to usual care on a composite outcome of hospital readmission and/or ED visitation at 30 and 60 days following discharge. Randomized controlled pilot study in 41 medical inpatients predisposed to unplanned readmission or postdischarge ED visitation, conducted at Baylor University Medical Center. The intervention group care bundle consisted of medication counseling/reconciliation by a clinical pharmacist (CP), condition specific education/enhanced discharge planning by a care coordinator (CC), and phone follow-up. Groups had similar baseline characteristics. Intervention group readmission/ED visit rates were reduced at 30 days compared to the control group (10.0% versus 38.1%, P = 0.04), but not at 60 days (30.0% versus 42.9%, P = 0.52). For those patients who had a readmission/postdischarge ED visit, the time interval to this event was longer in the intervention group compared to usual care (36.2 versus 15.7 days, P = 0.05). Study power was insufficient to reliably compare the effects of the intervention on lengths of index hospital stay between groups. A targeted care bundle delivered to high-risk elderly inpatients decreased unplanned acute health care utilization up to 30 days following discharge. Dissipation of this effect by 60 days postdischarge defines reasonable expectations for analogous hospital-based educational interventions. Further research is needed regarding the impacts of similar care bundles in larger populations across a variety of inpatient settings. (c) 2009 Society of Hospital Medicine.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Services and Delivery Research
                Health Serv Deliv Res
                National Institute for Health Research
                2050-4349
                2050-4357
                April 2018
                April 2018
                : 6
                : 16
                : 1-142
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
                Article
                10.3310/hsdr06160
                4d6fab4f-254a-4438-9c75-6272a5d344cf
                © 2018

                Free to read

                http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/non-commercial-government-licence/non-commercial-government-licence.htm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article