2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Clinician knowledge and behaviors related to the 4Ms framework of Age‐Friendly Health Systems

      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 Age‐Friendly Health Systems (AFHS) aims to improve the experience of care for adults aged 65 years and older through the 4Ms framework, an evidence‐based approach to care planning that emphasizes what matters most to the older person, mentation, mobility, and medication. The aim of this study was to examine clinicians' attitudes, knowledge, and practices concerning AFHS and the 4Ms.

          Methods

          We surveyed U.S.‐based health care providers randomly identified from the Medscape database. The sample was weighted based on sex, U.S. Census region, and ethnic diversity of health occupations. We examined the differences between cohorts using proportions tests and logistic regression models.

          Results

          More than 90% of clinicians ( n = 1684) agreed that “older patients require a different approach to care than younger patients.” Fifty percent of clinicians “always” take the age of their patient into consideration when determining care. A majority of clinicians said they discuss each of the 4Ms with older patients and/or their family caregivers. Screening for depression and review of high‐risk medication use are among the leading types of age‐friendly care that clinicians provide to older patients. A minority of clinicians are asking older adults about and aligning the care plan with What Matters.

          Conclusions

          A majority of clinicians acknowledged the benefits of providing care via AFHS but reported limited knowledge of the specificities of the 4Ms framework and are not necessarily taking the age of their patients into consideration when determining the best form of care. Health care settings that have implemented the 4Ms framework appear to be doing so in an incomplete way. Our study reinforces the case for training primary care providers on how to adopt the evidence‐based 4Ms framework in clinical practice effectively and consistently.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

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

          STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 2

          Purpose: screening tool of older people's prescriptions (STOPP) and screening tool to alert to right treatment (START) criteria were first published in 2008. Due to an expanding therapeutics evidence base, updating of the criteria was required. Methods: we reviewed the 2008 STOPP/START criteria to add new evidence-based criteria and remove any obsolete criteria. A thorough literature review was performed to reassess the evidence base of the 2008 criteria and the proposed new criteria. Nineteen experts from 13 European countries reviewed a new draft of STOPP & START criteria including proposed new criteria. These experts were also asked to propose additional criteria they considered important to include in the revised STOPP & START criteria and to highlight any criteria from the 2008 list they considered less important or lacking an evidence base. The revised list of criteria was then validated using the Delphi consensus methodology. Results: the expert panel agreed a final list of 114 criteria after two Delphi validation rounds, i.e. 80 STOPP criteria and 34 START criteria. This represents an overall 31% increase in STOPP/START criteria compared with version 1. Several new STOPP categories were created in version 2, namely antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs, drugs affecting, or affected by, renal function and drugs that increase anticholinergic burden; new START categories include urogenital system drugs, analgesics and vaccines. Conclusion: STOPP/START version 2 criteria have been expanded and updated for the purpose of minimizing inappropriate prescribing in older people. These criteria are based on an up-to-date literature review and consensus validation among a European panel of experts.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            American Geriatrics Society 2019 Updated AGS Beers Criteria® for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults

            (2019)
            The American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Beers Criteria® (AGS Beers Criteria®) for Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) Use in Older Adults are widely used by clinicians, educators, researchers, healthcare administrators, and regulators. Since 2011, the AGS has been the steward of the criteria and has produced updates on a 3-year cycle. The AGS Beers Criteria® is an explicit list of PIMs that are typically best avoided by older adults in most circumstances or under specific situations, such as in certain diseases or conditions. For the 2019 update, an interdisciplinary expert panel reviewed the evidence published since the last update (2015) to determine if new criteria should be added or if existing criteria should be removed or undergo changes to their recommendation, rationale, level of evidence, or strength of recommendation. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:674-694, 2019.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Polypharmacy Among Adults Aged 65 Years and Older in the United States: 1988–2010

              Older adults frequently have several chronic health conditions which require multiple medications. We illustrated trends in prescription medication use over 20 years in the United States, and described characteristics of older adults using multiple medications in 2009-2010.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                terry.fulmer@johnahartford.org
                Journal
                J Am Geriatr Soc
                J Am Geriatr Soc
                10.1111/(ISSN)1532-5415
                JGS
                Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
                John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (Hoboken, USA )
                0002-8614
                1532-5415
                27 November 2021
                March 2022
                : 70
                : 3 ( doiID: 10.1111/jgs.v70.3 )
                : 789-800
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Market Research WebMD New York New York USA
                [ 2 ] The John A. Hartford Foundation New York New York USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Terry Fulmer, The John A. Hartford Foundation, 55 East 59th Street, 16th Floor, New York, NY 10022, USA.

                Email: terry.fulmer@ 123456johnahartford.org

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9816-510X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-5158
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1027-7444
                Article
                JGS17571
                10.1111/jgs.17571
                9299469
                34837381
                e7417cb0-7df8-43e4-9807-28c2a2c5cd22
                © 2021 The Authors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                : 29 October 2021
                : 30 August 2021
                : 31 October 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, Pages: 12, Words: 6467
                Funding
                Funded by: The John A. Hartford Foundation , doi 10.13039/100000909;
                Categories
                Clinical Investigation
                Regular Issue Content
                Clinical Investigations
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                March 2022
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.1.7 mode:remove_FC converted:20.07.2022

                Geriatric medicine
                4ms framework,age‐friendly health systems,health care
                Geriatric medicine
                4ms framework, age‐friendly health systems, health care

                Comments

                Comment on this article