Search

Abstract Background Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is considered the gold standard approach to improving a range of outcomes for older adults living with frailty admitted to hospital. To date, research has predominantly focused on quantitative syntheses of the international evidence with limited focus on qualitative synthesis of stakeholder perspectives. This review aims to resolve this research gap by identifying and synthesising qualitative studies reporting multiple stakeholders’ experiences of inpatient CGA. Methods A systematic search of five electronic databases was conducted. Qualitative or mixed methods studies that included qualitative findings on the experiences of CGA in an inpatient hospital setting from the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCP), older adults, and those important to them were included. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (Registration: CRD42021283167) and the 10-item Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used to appraise the methodological quality of included studies. Results were synthesised as a meta-ethnography. Results Eleven studies, which reported on the experiences of 153 HCPs, 91 older adults and 57 caregivers were included. The studies dated from 2011 to 2021 and three key themes were identified: (1) HCPs, older adults and caregivers report conflicting views on CGA as a holistic process, (2) most HCPs, but only some older adults and caregivers view CGA goalsetting and care planning as collaborative, and (3) all stakeholders value care continuity during the transition from hospital to home but often fail to achieve it. Conclusion While HCPs, older adults, and caregivers’ values and ambitions related to CGA broadly align, their experiences often differ. The identified themes highlight organisational and relational factors, which positively and negatively influence CGA practices and processes in an inpatient hospital setting.

Abstract Background Innovations in models of care for older adults living with frailty presenting to the emergency department (ED) have become a key priority for clinicians, researchers and policymakers due to the deleterious outcomes older adults experience due to prolonged exposure to such an environment. This study aimed to develop a set of expert consensus-based statements underpinning operational design, outcome measurement and evaluation of a Frailty at the Front Door (FFD) model of care for older adults within an Irish context. Methods A modified real-time Delphi method was used. Facilitation of World Café focus groups with an expert panel of 86 members and seperate advisory groups with a Public and Patient Involvement panel of older adults and members of the Irish Association of Emergency Medicine generated a series of statements on the core elements of the FFD model of care. Statements were analysed thematically and incorporated into a real-time Delphi survey, which was emailed to members of the expert panel. Members were asked to rank 70 statements across nine domains using a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus criteria were defined a priori and guided by previous research using 9-point rating scales. Results Fifty members responded to the survey representing an overall response rate of 58%. Following analyses of the survey responses, the research team reviewed statements for content overlap and refined a final list of statements across the following domains: aims and objectives of the FFD model of care; target population; screening and assessment; interventions; technology; integration of care; evaluation and metrics; and research. Conclusion Development of a consensus derived FFD model of care represents an important step in generating national standards, implementation of a service model as intended and enhances opportunities for scientific impact. Future research should focus on the development of a core outcome set for studies involving older adults in the ED.

Background Functional hand use post injury is important in enabling a person’s engagement in daily living tasks. Without proper treatment, there may be difficulties in self-care, engaging in job roles, or leisure pursuits. Occupational therapists are key health care practitioners for people with upper limb conditions. This systematic review aims to appraise and summarise current evidence regarding effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions among adults with conditions of the hand, wrist, and forearm. Methods A systematic review of randomised control trials and quasi randomised controlled trials will be completed. MEDLINE OVID, CINAHL, CENTRAL, COCHRANE, PUBMED and EMBASE databases will be systematically searched. Grey literature will be searched for via Google Scholar. Studies will be included if they include provision of occupational therapy to adults with a hand, wrist, or forearm condition when compared to treatment as usual or an alternative treatment option. The primary outcome will be function. Secondary outcomes will include satisfaction with occupational performance, quality of life, pain experience, and participation. The Brief International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for Hand Conditions will be used to categorise outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework will be utilised to assess quality. A pooled meta- analysis will be completed using RevMan, depending on the uniformity and availability of data. Results This review aims to synthesise high quality evidence to identify the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions with patients with a hand, wrist, or forearm condition, categorising outcomes in relation to the ICF Core Set for Hand Conditions. Conclusions By synthesising the evidence there is potential for improved evidence base for clinicians; improved outcomes for patients; as well as potential economic benefit. This study is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42022337070.

Abstract Background Older adults are at increased risk for disease severity and poorer prognosis following COVID-19 infection. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to explore the impact of multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the acute or post-acute hospital setting for older adults with COVID-19. Methods The Cochrane library, EMBASE, Cinahl and Medline (via EBSCO), PubMed, and Web of Science were systematically searched in June 2022 and a repeat search was completed in March 2023. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted independently by two reviewers. Studies reporting outcomes for older adults following multidisciplinary rehabilitation (provided by two or more Health and Social Care Professionals) were included. Both observational and experimental study designs were included. The primary outcome was functional ability. Secondary outcomes included discharge disposition, acute hospital and rehabilitation unit length of stay, mortality, primary and secondary healthcare utilisation, and long-term effects of COVID-19. Results Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 570 older adults. Where reported, older adults stayed in the acute hospital for a mean of 18 days (95%CI, 13.35- 23.13 days) and in rehabilitation units for 19 days (95%CI, 15.88–21.79 days). There was a significant improvement in functional ability among older adults with COVID-19 who received multidisciplinary rehabilitation (REM, SMD = 1.46, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.98). The proportion of older adults who were discharged directly home following rehabilitation ranged from 62 to 97%. Two studies reported a 2% inpatient mortality rate of older persons during rehabilitative care. No study followed up patients after the point of discharge and no study reported on long term effects of COVID-19. Conclusions Multidisciplinary rehabilitation may result in improved functional outcomes on discharge from rehabilitation units/centres for older adults with COVID-19. Findings also highlight the need for further research into the long-term effect of rehabilitation for older adults following COVID-19. Future research should comprehensively describe multidisciplinary rehabilitation in terms of disciplines involved and the intervention provided.

Background: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been shown to improve outcomes in hospitalised older adults; however, there is currently no compelling evidence to support CGA interventions within the Emergency Department (ED). The aim of this study is to explore the clinical and process outcomes of older adults who receive ED-CGA over a period of six months after their initial ED attendance. Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: The STrengthening the Reporting of the OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) standardised reporting guidelines will be adhered to. Older adults aged ≥65 years who score ≥2 on the Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) tool and present to the ED with a medical complaint during the operational hours of the dedicated interdisciplinary team, will be considered eligible for recruitment. Demographic and health assessment information will be obtained at the ED index attendance followed by completion of an interdisciplinary CGA. A dedicated research nurse will complete follow-up telephone interviews with participants at 30 days and six months. The primary outcome will be incidence of hospital admission from the ED index attendance. Secondary outcomes will include functional decline, patient satisfaction with the ED index attendance, unscheduled ED reattendance(s), unscheduled hospital (re)admission(s), nursing home admission(s), healthcare utilisation, and death. Descriptive statistics will be used to profile the characteristics of the study participants and multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis will be used to analyse risk of adverse outcomes. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was granted by the University of Limerick Hospital Group Research Ethics Committee (107/2021). The authors will disseminate study findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at national and international conferences. Patient and public involvement will be sought from a panel of older adults at the Ageing Research Centre in the University of Limerick. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05252182.