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

      Supporting elderly people with cognitive impairment during and after hospital stays with intersectoral care management: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

      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

          Background

          The sectorization of health-care systems leads to inefficient treatment, especially for elderly people with cognitive impairment. The transition from hospital care to primary care is insufficiently coordinated, and communication between health-care providers is often lacking. Consequences include a further deterioration of health, higher rates of hospital readmissions, and institutionalization. Models of collaborative care have shown their efficacy in primary care by improving patient-related outcomes. The main goal of this trial is to compare the effectiveness of a collaborative care model with usual care for people with cognitive impairment who have been admitted to a hospital for treatment due to a somatic illness. The aim of the intervention is to improve the continuity of treatment and care across the transition between the in-hospital and adjoining primary care sectors.

          Methods/design

          The trial is a longitudinal multisite randomized controlled trial with two arms (care as usual and intersectoral care management). Inclusion criteria at the time of hospital admission due to a somatic illness are age 70+ years, cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination, MMSE ≤26), living at home, and written informed consent. Each participant will have a baseline assessment at the hospital and two follow-up assessments at home (3 and 12 months after discharge). The estimated sample size is n = 398 people with cognitive inmpairement plus their respective informal caregivers (where available).

          In the intersectoral care management group, specialized care managers will develop, implement, and monitor individualized treatment and care based on comprehensive assessments of the unmet needs of the patients and their informal caregivers. These assessments will occur at the hospital and in participants’ homes. Primary outcomes are (1) activities of daily living, (2) readmission to the hospital, and (3) institutionalization. Secondary outcomes include (a) frailty, (b) delirium, (c) quality of life, (d) cognitive status, (e) behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, (f) utilization of services, and (g) informal caregiver burden.

          Discussion

          In the event of proving efficacy, this trial will deliver a proof of concept for implementation into routine care. The cost-effectiveness analyses as well as an independent process evaluation will increase the likelihood of meeting this goal. The trial will enable an in-depth analysis of mediating and moderating effects for different health outcomes at the interface between hospital care and primary care. By highlighting treatment and care, the study will provide insights into unmet needs at the time of hospital admission, and the opportunities and barriers to meeting those needs during the hospital stay and after discharge.

          Trial registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03359408; December 2, 2017.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3636-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

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

          Do increases in patient activation result in improved self-management behaviors?

          The purpose of this study is to determine whether patient activation is a changing or changeable characteristic and to assess whether changes in activation also are accompanied by changes in health behavior. To obtain variability in activation and self-management behavior, a controlled trial with chronic disease patients randomized into either intervention or control conditions was employed. In addition, changes in activation that occurred in the total sample were also examined for the study period. Using Mplus growth models, activation latent growth classes were identified and used in the analysis to predict changes in health behaviors and health outcomes. Survey data from the 479 participants were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 6 months. Positive change in activation is related to positive change in a variety of self-management behaviors. This is true even when the behavior in question is not being performed at baseline. When the behavior is already being performed at baseline, an increase in activation is related to maintaining a relatively high level of the behavior over time. The impact of the intervention, however, was less clear, as the increase in activation in the intervention group was matched by nearly equal increases in the control group. Results suggest that if activation is increased, a variety of improved behaviors will follow. The question still remains, however, as to what interventions will improve activation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold.

            Cost-effectiveness analyses, particularly in the USA, commonly use a figure of $50,000 per life-year or quality-adjusted life-year gained as a threshold for assessing the cost-effectiveness of an intervention. The history of this practice is ill defined, although it has been linked to the end-stage renal disease kidney dialysis cost-effectiveness literature from the 1980s. The use of $50,000 as a benchmark for assessing the cost-effectiveness of an intervention first emerged in 1992 and became widely used after 1996. The appeal of the $50,000 figure appears to lie in the convenience of a round number rather than in the value of renal dialysis. Rather than arbitrary thresholds, estimates of willingness to pay and the opportunity cost of healthcare resources are needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) and its use in grading the nutritional state of elderly patients.

              The Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) has recently been designed and validated to provide a single, rapid assessment of nutritional status in elderly patients in outpatient clinics, hospitals, and nursing homes. It has been translated into several languages and validated in many clinics around the world. The MNA test is composed of simple measurements and brief questions that can be completed in about 10 min. Discriminant analysis was used to compare the findings of the MNA with the nutritional status determined by physicians, using the standard extensive nutritional assessment including complete anthropometric, clinical biochemistry, and dietary parameters. The sum of the MNA score distinguishes between elderly patients with: 1) adequate nutritional status, MNA > or = 24; 2) protein-calorie malnutrition, MNA < 17; 3) at risk of malnutrition, MNA between 17 and 23.5. With this scoring, sensitivity was found to be 96%, specificity 98%, and predictive value 97%. The MNA scale was also found to be predictive of mortality and hospital cost. Most important it is possible to identify people at risk for malnutrition, scores between 17 and 23.5, before severe changes in weight or albumin levels occur. These individuals are more likely to have a decrease in caloric intake that can be easily corrected by nutritional intervention.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                angela.nikelski@evkb.de
                armin.keller@dzne.de
                fanny.schumacher-schoenert@dzne.de
                terese.dehl@uni-greifswald.de
                jessica.laufer@dzne.de
                ulf.sauerbrey@uni-jena.de
                diana.wucherer@dzne.de
                adina.dreier@web.de
                bernhard.michalowsky@dzne.de
                ina.zwingmann@dzne.de
                horst.vollmar@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
                wolfgang.hoffmann@dzne.de
                stefan.kreisel@evkb.de
                rene.thyrian@dzne.de
                Journal
                Trials
                Trials
                Trials
                BioMed Central (London )
                1745-6215
                30 August 2019
                30 August 2019
                2019
                : 20
                : 543
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, Bethesdaweg 12, 33617 Bielefeld, Germany
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0438 0426, GRID grid.424247.3, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), ; site Rostock/Greifswald, Ellernholzstr. 1-2, 17489 Greifswald, Germany
                [3 ]GRID grid.5603.0, Department of Epidemiology and Community Health, , Institute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, ; Ellernholzstr. 1-2, 17489 Greifswald, Germany
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8517 6224, GRID grid.275559.9, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital Jena, ; Bachstr. 18, 07743 Jena, Germany
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0490 981X, GRID grid.5570.7, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ruhr-University Bochum (RUB), ; Gebäude MA, Universitätsstraße 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6889-693X
                Article
                3636
                10.1186/s13063-019-3636-5
                6716860
                31470912
                a2f423df-d7df-4cc5-85d2-899309141d09
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 3 April 2019
                : 8 August 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002347, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung;
                Award ID: 01GL1701A
                Award ID: 01GL1701B
                Award ID: 01GL1701C
                Award ID: 01GL1701D
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Medicine
                discharge management,health care,dementia care,collaborative care,cognitive impairment,care management,case management

                Comments

                Comment on this article