Search

Objectives: To determine whether community-based primary care physician (PCP)-nurse practitioner (NP) comanagement implementing the Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE)-2 model: (case finding, delegation of data collection, structured visit notes, physician and patient education, and linkage to community resources) can improve the quality of care for geriatric conditions., Design: Case study., Setting: Two community-based primary care practices., Participants: Patients aged 75 and older who screened positive for at least one condition: falls, urinary incontinence (UI), dementia, and depression., Intervention: The ACOVE-2 model augmented by NP comanagement of conditions., Measurements: Quality of care according to medical record review using ACOVE-3 quality indicators (QIs). Individuals receiving comanagement were compared with those who received PCP care alone in the same practices., Results: Of 1,084 screened individuals, 658 (61%) screened positive for more than one condition; 485 of these were randomly selected for chart review and triggered a mean of seven QIs. A NP saw 49% for comanagement. Overall, individuals received 57% of recommended care. Quality scores for all conditions (falls, 80% vs 34%; UI, 66% vs 19%; dementia, 59% vs 38%) except depression (63% vs 60%) were higher for individuals who saw a NP. In analyses adjusted for sex and age of patient, number of conditions, site, and a NP estimate of medical management style, NP comanagement remained significantly associated with receiving recommended care (P < .001), as did NP estimate of medical management style (P = .02)., Conclusion: NP comanagement is associated with better quality of care for geriatric conditions in community-based primary care than usual care using the ACOVE-2 model., (© 2013, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2013, The American Geriatrics Society.)

Objectives: To use a formal decision-making strategy to reach clinically appropriate, internally consistent decisions on the application of quality indicators (QIs) to vulnerable elders (VEs) with advanced dementia (AD) or poor prognosis (PP)., Design: Using a conceptual model that classifies QIs principally by aim and burden of the care process, 12 clinical experts rated whether each Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders-3 (ACOVE-3) QI should be applied in evaluating quality of care for older persons with AD or PP. QI exclusions were assessed for each of the 26 conditions and by whether these conditions were mainly medical (e.g., diabetes mellitus), geriatric (e.g., falls), or crosscutting processes of care (e.g., pain management). QI exclusions were also identified for older persons who decided against hospitalization or surgery., Results: Of 392 ACOVE-3 QIs, 140 (36%) were excluded for patients with AD and 135 (34%) for patients with PP; 57% of QIs focusing on medical conditions were excluded from patients with AD and 53% from patients with PP, whereas only 20% of QIs for geriatric conditions were excluded from AD and 15% from PP. All QIs with care processes judged to carry a heavy burden were excluded; 86% of moderate-burden QIs were excluded from AD and 92% from PP. All QIs aimed at long-term goals were excluded; 83% of intermediate-term goal QIs were excluded from AD and 98% from PP. Individuals holding a preference to forgo hospitalization or surgery would be excluded from 7% of potentially applicable QIs., Conclusion: Measurement of quality of care for VEs with AD, PP, and less-aggressive care preferences should include only a subset of the ACOVE-3 QIs, largely those whose burden is light and whose goal is continuity or short-term improvement or prevention.