Search

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic weight of multimorbidity and functional impairment over long-term mortality among older patients discharged from acute care hospitals., Design: A prospective multicenter observational study., Setting and Participants: Our series consisted of 1967 adults aged ≥65 years consecutively admitted to acute care wards in Italy, in the context of the Report-AGE project., Methods: After signing a written informed consent, all patients underwent comprehensive geriatric assessment by Inter-RAI Minimum Data Set acute care. The primary endpoint of the present study was long-term mortality. Patients were grouped into 3 functional clusters and 3 disease clusters using the K-medians cluster analysis. The association of functional clusters, disease clusters, and Charlson score categories with long-term mortality was investigated through Cox regression analysis and the intercluster classification agreement was further estimated. Finally, the additive effect of either disease clusters or Charlson score on predictive ability of functional clusters was assessed by using changes in Harrell's C-index and categorical Net Reclassification Index (NRI)., Results: Functional clusters, disease clusters, and Charlson score were significant predictors of long-term mortality, but the interclassification agreement was poor. Functional clusters predicted mortality with greater accuracy [C-index 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.68] compared with disease clusters (C-index 0.54, 95% CI 0.53-0.56), and Charlson score (C-index 0.58, 95% CI 0.56-0.59). Adding multimorbidity (NRI 0.23, 95% CI 0.14-0.31) or Charlson score (NRI 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.20) to functional cluster model slightly improved the accuracy of prediction., Conclusions and Implications: Functional impairment may better predict prognosis compared with multimorbidity, which may be relevant to optimally address individuals' needs and to design tailored preventive interventions., (Copyright © 2021 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Even though there is a constant and accelerating growth of the aging population worldwide, such a rapid rise is negatively impacting available home and community services not able to encompass the necessities associated with the increased number of older people. In particular, there are increasing demands on e-health care services and smart technologies needed for frail elders with chronic diseases and also for those experiencing active aging. Advanced Technology Care Innovation for older persons encompasses all sectors (assistive technology, robotics, home automation, and home care- and institution-based healthcare monitoring, telemedicine) dedicated to promoting health and wellbeing in all types of living environments. Considering that there is a large concern and demand by older persons to remain in familiar social living surroundings, study projects joined with industries have been currently initiated, especially across Europe to improve health and wellbeing. This article will highlight the latest updates in Europe and, in particular in Italy, regarding scientific projects dedicated to unraveling how diverse needs can be translated into an up-to-date technology innovation for the growing elder population. We will provide information regarding advanced technology designed for those with specific geriatric-correlated conditions in familiar living settings and for individuals aging actively. This is an important action because numerous emerging developments are based on user needs identified by geriatricians, thus, underlining the indispensable role of geriatric medicine toward future guidelines on specific technology., (Copyright © 2014 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The most frequent cause of mortality and morbidity in industrialized countries is coronary artery disease (CAD), which in Europe alone is responsible for around two million deaths per year. In 2001 it accounted for about 260,000 hospital discharges in Italy. The costs of CAD treatment in Italy--which were borne by the Italian state, the third-party payer--amounted to 800 million euros. We propose to assess the pharmacoeconomic implications of using amlodipine besylate treatment in Italy for patients with coronary artery disease. The study is based on a post-hoc cost-effectiveness analysis that compared standard care supplemented by amlodipine besylate with ordinary standard care over a 36-month time horizon. The clinical outcome data were based on the prospective randomized evaluation of vascular effect of norvasc trial (PREVENT). Direct medical costs referred to the purchase costs of amlodipine besylate and the cost of National Health Service (NHS) hospitalization. The costs were discounted back at an annual rate of 5%. Patients administered amlodipine besylate exhibited a significant risk reduction with respect to any major vascular event or procedure when compared to the placebo group. The reduction mainly referred to unstable angina events and revascularization procedures. We estimated that the total cost of adding amlodipine besylate to standard care amounted to 139,050 euros per 1000 patients treated for 36 months. This represents a cost of 1780 euros per patient remaining free of any vascular event. Results were sensitive to both clinical and economic variables. The incremental costs of the alternative therapy ranged from 296 euros to 5066 per patient free of any event in, respectively, the best and worst scenario. Amlodipine besylate therapy can be a cost-effective strategy for CAD treatment in Italy. Our economic evaluation demonstrated, first, that by reducing vascular events and the need for revascularization procedures savings were achieved in hospital expenditure, and, second, that such savings could significantly offset drug costs.

In Italy, revascularization interventions increased from 44,600 in 1996 to more than 100,000 in 2001. In particular, the occurrence of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) increased from 239 cases per million population in 1994 to about 1300 cases per million population in 2001. This trend has caused a concomitant increase in revascularization costs, which have doubled in few years, rising from Euro 421 millions in 1996 to Euro 850 millions in 2001. In 2001, PTCA amounted to 55% of total cost of revascularizations. The aim of this study was to assess the pharmacoeconomic consequences of amlodipine besylate therapy administered in patients at high risk of restenosis after PTCA. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing therapy with amlodipine besylate added to standard care versus standard care alone. Information on clinical outcomes was drawn from the Coronary Angioplasty Amlodipine Restenosis Study (CAPARES). Medical costs were estimated with reference to drug therapy and hospitalizations for coronary events and revascularization procedures. The study was conducted from the perspective of the Italian third party payer (National Health Service). The analysis was applied to a time horizon of 4 months. Amlodipine besylate resulted less expensive and more effective than standard care. It reduced mortality, morbidity for coronary reasons and the need of revascularization procedures. The cost per 1000 patients was estimated at Euro 1,166,000 in the placebo and Euro 950,000 in the amlodipine besylate group, resulting into a cost saving of Euro 216,000, that is 18.5% of total cost of standard care. Results are sensitive to the cost of amlodipine besylate and the cost of hospitalizations, but therapy with amlodipine besylate resulted dominant even in the most unfavorable hypothesis.