Search

Background: undertaking comprehensive geriatric assessments (CGAs) combined with long-term health and social care management can improve the quality of life of older people [1]. The EASY-Care tool is a CGA instrument designed for assessing the physical, mental and social functioning and unmet health and social needs of older people in community settings or primary care. It has also been used as a frailty assessment tool and for gathering population-level data. Objective: to review the evidence of reliability, validity and acceptability of EASY-Care and its appropriateness for assessing the needs of community-dwelling older people. Methods: systematic search of literature databases using pre-defined search terms (January 1994--May 2014) for English language articles reporting on the reliability, validity, acceptability and implementation of EASY-Care in primary care and community settings. Eligible articles were critically reviewed. Discussion papers mapping professionals' use of the tool were also included as these could be considered an aspect of validity. Results: twenty-nine papers met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. A narrative synthesis was performed, because there was a variety of quantitative and qualitative outcomes and characteristics. Reliability evidence for EASY-Care is minimal. Evidence for validity is good, and it has received numerous positive endorsements of acceptability in international settings from older people and practitioners. Conclusion: evidence supports the use of EASY-Care for individual needs assessment; further research is needed for other uses. Of the papers that made statements about who should administer EASY-Care, the majority indicated that nurses were preferable to self-completion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) is now the accepted gold standard for caring for frail older people in hospital. However, there is uncertainty about identifying and targeting suitable recipients and which patients benefit the most. Objectives: our objectives were to describe the key elements, principal measures of outcome and the characteristics of the main beneficiaries of inpatient CGA. Methods: we used the Joanna Briggs Institute umbrella review method. We searched for systematic reviews and metaanalyses describing CGA services for hospital inpatients in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), MEDLINE and EMBASE and a range of other sources. Results: we screened 1,010 titles and evaluated 419 abstracts for eligibility, 143 full articles for relevance and included 24 in a final quality and relevance check. Thirteen reviews, reported in 15 papers, were selected for review. The most widely used definition of CGA was: 'a multidimensional, multidisciplinary process which identifies medical, social and functional needs, and the development of an integrated/co-ordinated care plan to meet those needs'. Key clinical outcomes included mortality, activities of daily living and dependency. The main beneficiaries were people ≥55 years in receipt of acute care. Frailty in CGA recipients and patient related outcomes were not usually reported. Conclusions: we confirm a widely used definition of CGA. Key outcomes are death, disability and institutionalisation. The main beneficiaries in hospital are older people with acute illness. The presence of frailty has not been widely examined as a determinant of CGA outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background community-based complex interventions for older adults have a variety of names, including Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, but often share core components such as holistic needs assessment and care planning. Objective to summarise evidence for the components and effectiveness of community-based complex interventions for improving older adults' independent living and quality of life (QoL). Methods we searched nine databases and trial registries to February 2022 for randomised controlled trials comparing complex interventions to usual care. Primary outcomes included living at home and QoL. Secondary outcomes included mortality, hospitalisation, institutionalisation, cognitive function and functional status. We pooled data using risk ratios (RRs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results we included 50 trials of mostly moderate quality. Most reported using holistic assessment (94%) and care planning (90%). Twenty-seven (54%) involved multidisciplinary care, with 29.6% delivered mainly by primary care teams without geriatricians. Nurses were the most frequent care coordinators. Complex interventions increased the likelihood of living at home (RR 1.05; 95% CI 1.00–1.10; moderate-quality evidence) but did not affect QoL. Supported by high-quality evidence, they reduced mortality (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.77–0.96), enhanced cognitive function (SMD 0.12; 95% CI 0.02–0.22) and improved instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) (SMD 0.11; 95% CI 0.01–0.21) and combined basic/instrumental ADLs (SMD 0.08; 95% CI 0.03–0.13). Conclusions complex interventions involving holistic assessment and care planning increased the chance of living at home, reduced mortality and improved cognitive function and some ADLs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) provides prognostic benefit for high surgical-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), yet the impact to patient outcomes is far less understood. Method: we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate functional capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes for patients up to 12 months post TAVR. A total of 20 eligible publications, comprising randomised-controlled trials, observational studies and a registry study were identified from electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and others (inception to February 2017). Results: the total sample was 2,775 with a mean age of 81.8 ± 2.1 years, more than half (52%) were female and high surgical risk 9.6 ± 4.3% mean STS (Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk model). Post TAVR, patients had significant improvement in functional capacity of >40 m in the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.69-73.28) and a clinically meaningful increase in ability to perform daily physical-based tasks (Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), mean difference (MD) increase 5.42 points, 95% CI 3.16-7.68). HRQoL improved consistently following TAVR regardless of measure used. Significant increases occurred in the physical component summary scores (PCS) of the short form (SF) health surveys (MD increase 10.45 (SF36) and 10.14 (SF12) points). Conclusion: functional capacity and HRQoL improved substantially following TAVR, despite evolving patient selection criteria, thus TAVR continues to provide a directly beneficial option for severe AS patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Identification of older persons at risk for the loss of independence, onset of (co)-morbidity or functional limitations through screening/assessment is of interest for the public health-care system. To date several different measurement instruments for overall physical function are frequently used in practice, but little information about their psychometric properties is available.Objectives and Methods: Our aim was to assess instruments with an overall score related to functional status and/or physical performance on content and psychometric properties. Electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, AMED, Cochrane Library and CINAHL) were searched, using MeSH terms and relevant keywords. Studies, published in English, were included if their primary or secondary purpose was to evaluate the measurement properties of measurement instruments for overall physical function in community-dwelling older persons aged 60 years and older. Reliability, validity, responsiveness and practicability were evaluated, adhering to a specified protocol.Results: In total 78 articles describing 12 different functional assessment instruments were included and data extracted. Seven instruments, including their modified versions, were evaluated for reliability. Nine instruments, including their modified versions, were evaluated with regard to validity.Conclusion: In conclusion, the Short Physical Performance Battery can be recommended most highly in terms of validity, reliability and responsiveness, followed by the Physical Performance Test and Continuous Scale Physical Functional Performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]