Search

Background: Potentially avoidable risk factors continue to cause unnecessary disability and premature death in older people. Health risk assessment (HRA), a method successfully used in working-age populations, is a promising method for cost-effective health promotion and preventive care in older individuals, but the long-term effects of this approach are unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of an innovative approach to HRA and counselling in older individuals for health behaviours, preventive care, and long-term survival., Methods and Findings: This study was a pragmatic, single-centre randomised controlled clinical trial in community-dwelling individuals aged 65 y or older registered with one of 19 primary care physician (PCP) practices in a mixed rural and urban area in Switzerland. From November 2000 to January 2002, 874 participants were randomly allocated to the intervention and 1,410 to usual care. The intervention consisted of HRA based on self-administered questionnaires and individualised computer-generated feedback reports, combined with nurse and PCP counselling over a 2-y period. Primary outcomes were health behaviours and preventive care use at 2 y and all-cause mortality at 8 y. At baseline, participants in the intervention group had a mean ± standard deviation of 6.9 ± 3.7 risk factors (including unfavourable health behaviours, health and functional impairments, and social risk factors) and 4.3 ± 1.8 deficits in recommended preventive care. At 2 y, favourable health behaviours and use of preventive care were more frequent in the intervention than in the control group (based on z-statistics from generalised estimating equation models). For example, 70% compared to 62% were physically active (odds ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.16-1.77, p = 0.001), and 66% compared to 59% had influenza vaccinations in the past year (odds ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.66, p = 0.005). At 8 y, based on an intention-to-treat analysis, the estimated proportion alive was 77.9% in the intervention and 72.8% in the control group, for an absolute mortality difference of 4.9% (95% CI 1.3%-8.5%, p = 0.009; based on z-test for risk difference). The hazard ratio of death comparing intervention with control was 0.79 (95% CI 0.66-0.94, p = 0.009; based on Wald test from Cox regression model), and the number needed to receive the intervention to prevent one death was 21 (95% CI 12-79). The main limitations of the study include the single-site study design, the use of a brief self-administered questionnaire for 2-y outcome data collection, the unavailability of other long-term outcome data (e.g., functional status, nursing home admissions), and the availability of long-term follow-up data on mortality for analysis only in 2014., Conclusions: This is the first trial to our knowledge demonstrating that a collaborative care model of HRA in community-dwelling older people not only results in better health behaviours and increased use of recommended preventive care interventions, but also improves survival. The intervention tested in our study may serve as a model of how to implement a relatively low-cost but effective programme of disease prevention and health promotion in older individuals., Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN 28458424.

Background and Aims: In clinical practice, the status of living alone is often used as the only measure describing an older person's social network. We evaluated whether additional use of a brief social network measure provides relevant additional information in relation to social support and engagement., Methods: Cross-sectional survey of 6982 community- dwelling adults 65 years or older living in London, UK; Hamburg, Germany; and Solothurn, Switzerland. Data were collected using the self-administered multidimensional Health Risk Appraisal Questionnaire. Multivariate models were used to analyse adjusted correlations between the two measures of social network (living alone status, risk for social isolation with marginal family and friend network subscales) and potential consequences of inadequate social network (marginal emotional or instrumental support, lack of social engagement)., Results: Living alone status was more strongly associated with marginal instrumental support [OR=7.6 (95% CI 6.3, 9.1)] than with marginal emotional support [OR=4.2 (95% CI 3.4, 5.1)], and showed no statistically significant association with lack of social engagement [OR=0.9 (95% CI 0.8, 1.0)]. Risk of social isolation was more strongly related to marginal emotional support [OR=6.6 (95% CI 5.4, 8.0)] than to marginal instrumental support [OR=3.3 (95% CI 2.8, 4.0)], and was moderately related to lack of social engagement [OR=2.9 (95% CI 2.5, 3.4]. Marginal family and friend network subscales showed consistent and unique associations with social support and social engagement., Conclusion: Findings suggest that living alone status and a brief measure of social network identifies distinctive at-risk groups and potential pathways for intervention. Geriatric assessment programs including both social network measures may provide useful information about potentially modifiable social network risks in older persons.

Objective: To explore the feasibility and psychometric properties of a self-administered version of the 24-item Geriatric Pain Measure (GPM-24-SA)., Design: Secondary analysis of baseline data from the Prevention in Older People-Assessment in Generalists' practices trial, an international multi-center study of a health-risk appraisal system., Participants: One thousand seventy-two community dwelling nondisabled older adults self-reporting pain from London, UK; Hamburg, Germany; and Solothurn, Switzerland., Outcome Measures: GPM-24-SA as part of a multidimensional Health Risk Appraisal Questionnaire including self-reported demographic and health-related information., Results: Among the 1,072 subjects, 655 had complete GPM-24-SA data, 404 had 30% missing GPM-24-SA data. In psychometric analyses across the three European populations with complete GPM-24-SA data, the measure exhibited stable internal consistency, good convergent, divergent and discriminant validity, and produced stable pain measurements. However, factor analysis indicated differences in the GPM-24-SA across sites with discrepancies mainly related to items of a single subscale that failed to load appropriately. Analyses including imputation for subjects with

Objectives: To develop and evaluate a short form of the 24-item Geriatric Pain Measure (GPM) for use in community-dwelling older adults., Design: Derivation and validation of a 12-item version of the GPM in a European and an independent U.S. sample of community-dwelling older adults., Setting: Three community-dwelling sites in London, United Kingdom; Hamburg, Germany; Solothurn, Switzerland; and two ambulatory geriatrics clinics in Los Angeles, California., Participants: European sample: 1,059 community-dwelling older persons from three sites (London, UK; Hamburg, Germany; Solothurn, Switzerland); validation sample: 50 persons from Los Angeles, California, ambulatory geriatric clinics., Measurements: Multidimensional questionnaire including self-reported demographic and clinical information., Results: Based on item-to-total scale correlations in the European sample, 11 of 24 GPM items were selected for inclusion in the short form. One additional item (pain-related sleep problems) was included based on clinical relevance. In the validation sample, the Cronbach alpha of GPM-12 was 0.92 (individual subscale range 0.77-0.92), and the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) between GPM-12 and the original GPM was 0.98. The correlation between the GPM-12 and the McGill Pain Questionnaire was 0.63 (P<.001), similar to the correlation between the original GPM and the McGill Pain Questionnaire (Pearson r=0.63; P<.001). Exploratory factor analysis indicated that the GPM-12 covers three subfactors (pain intensity, pain with ambulation, disengagement because of pain)., Conclusion: The GPM-12 demonstrated good validity and reliability in these European and U.S. populations of older adults. Despite its brevity, the GPM-12 captures the multidimensional nature of pain in three subscales. The self-administered GPM-12 may be useful in the clinical assessment process and management of pain and in pain-related research in older persons.

Background: Health risk appraisal is a promising method for health promotion and prevention in older persons. The Health Risk Appraisal for the Elderly (HRA-E) developed in the U.S. has unique features but has not been tested outside the United States., Methods: Based on the original HRA-E, we developed a scientifically updated and regionally adapted multilingual Health Risk Appraisal for Older Persons (HRA-O) instrument consisting of a self-administered questionnaire and software-generated feed-back reports. We evaluated the practicability and performance of the questionnaire in non-disabled community-dwelling older persons in London (U.K.) (N = 1090), Hamburg (Germany) (N = 804), and Solothurn (Switzerland) (N = 748) in a sub-sample of an international randomised controlled study., Results: Over eighty percent of invited older persons returned the self-administered HRA-O questionnaire. Fair or poor self-perceived health status and older age were correlated with higher rates of non-return of the questionnaire. Older participants and those with lower educational levels reported more difficulty in completing the HRA-O questionnaire as compared to younger and higher educated persons. However, even among older participants and those with low educational level, more than 80% rated the questionnaire as easy to complete. Prevalence rates of risks for functional decline or problems were between 2% and 91% for the 19 HRA-O domains. Participants' intention to change health behaviour suggested that for some risk factors participants were in a pre-contemplation phase, having no short- or medium-term plans for change. Many participants perceived their health behaviour or preventative care uptake as optimal, despite indications of deficits according to the HRA-O based evaluation., Conclusion: The HRA-O questionnaire was highly accepted by a broad range of community-dwelling non-disabled persons. It identified a high number of risks and problems, and provided information on participants' intention to change health behaviour.

Background: This paper describes the study protocol, the recruitment, and base-line data for evaluating the success of randomisation of the PRO-AGE (PRevention in Older people-Assessment in GEneralists' practices) project., Methods/design: A group of general practitioners (GPs) in London (U.K.), Hamburg (Germany) and Solothurn (Switzerland) were trained in risk identification, health promotion, and prevention in older people. Their non-disabled older patients were invited to participate in a randomised controlled study. Participants allocated to the intervention group were offered the Health Risk Appraisal for Older Persons (HRA-O) instrument with a site-specific method for reinforcement (London: physician reminders in electronic medical record; Hamburg: one group session or two preventive home visits; Solothurn: six-monthly preventive home visits over a two-year period). Participants allocated to the control group received usual care. At each site, an additional group of GPs did not receive the training, and their eligible patients were invited to participate in a concurrent comparison group. Primary outcomes are self-reported health behaviour and preventative care use at one-year follow-up. In Solothurn, an additional follow-up was conducted at two years. The number of older persons agreeing to participate (% of eligible persons) in the randomised controlled study was 2503 (66.0%) in London, 2580 (53.6%) in Hamburg, and 2284 (67.5%) in Solothurn. Base-line findings confirm that randomisation of participants was successful, with comparable characteristics between intervention and control groups. The number of persons (% of eligible) enrolled in the concurrent comparison group was 636 (48.8%) in London, 746 (35.7%) in Hamburg, and 1171 (63.0%) in Solothurn., Discussion: PRO-AGE is the first large-scale randomised controlled trial of health risk appraisal for older people in Europe. Its results will inform about the effects of implementing HRA-O with different methods of reinforcement.

Objectives: To validate the Probability of Repeated Admission (Pra) questionnaire, a widely used self-administered tool for predicting future healthcare use in older persons, in three European healthcare systems., Design: Prospective study with 1-year follow-up., Setting: Hamburg, Germany; London, United Kingdom; Canton of Solothurn, Switzerland., Participants: Nine thousand seven hundred thirteen independently living community-dwelling people aged 65 and older., Measurements: Self-administered eight-item Pra questionnaire at baseline. Self-reported number of hospital admissions and physician visits during 1 year of follow-up., Results: In the combined sample, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were 0.64 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.62-0.66) for the prediction of one or more hospital admissions and 0.68 (95% CI=0.66-0.69) for the prediction of more than six physician visits during the following year. AUCs were similar between sites. In comparison, prediction models based on a person's age and sex alone exhibited poor predictive validity (AUC or= 0.5) were 2.3 times as likely (95% CI=2.1-2.6) as low-risk individuals to have a hospital admission, and 2.1 times as likely (95% CI=2.0-2.2) to have more than six physician visits., Conclusion: The Pra instrument exhibits good validity for predicting future health service use on a population level in different healthcare settings. Administrative data have shown similar predictive validity, but in practice, such data are often not available. The Pra is likely of high interest to governments and health insurance companies worldwide as a basis for programs aimed at health risk management in older persons.

Objectives: To determine (1) the extent of agreement between the CAGE (acronym for cut down, annoyed by criticism, guilty about drinking, eye-opener drinks) and the Short Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test-Geriatric Version (SMAST-G) in identifying older persons who may have possible alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and (2) whether persons identified as having possible AUDs by each of these screening measures differ in their drinking, demographic, or health-related characteristics., Design: Secondary analysis of a cross-sectional study using data from a self-administered mailed survey sample., Setting: Three organizations were surveyed: (1) members of the American Association of Retired Persons and, in southern California, (2) managed care enrollees in a large medical group and (3) attendees of a community-based senior health center., Participants: One thousand eight hundred eighty-nine persons aged 55 and older completing a health risk appraisal for older persons (Health Risk Appraisal for the Elderly (HRA-E))., Measurements: The HRA-E included items on drinking behaviors (including amount of alcohol use, the CAGE, and the SMAST-G) and health and demographic characteristics., Results: Twenty-six percent of all persons screened positive on the CAGE or the SMAST-G. Fewer than half of all persons screening positive on either the CAGE or the SMAST-G, screened positive on both measures. Among current drinkers, persons screening positive on the SMAST-G alone drank less than persons screening positive on the CAGE alone, and these persons drank less than those screening positive on both the SMAST-G and the CAGE. More men screened positive on the CAGE alone than on the SMAST-G alone., Conclusion: Fewer than half of persons screening positive on either the CAGE or the SMAST-G screened positive on both measures, suggesting that these instruments may be capturing different aspects of unsafe drinking. A screening strategy employing both brief measures may identify more AUDs among older persons having differing demographic and health characteristics.

Objective: To enhance the validity of a well-known expert panel process, we used data from patient surveys to identify and correct rating errors., Methods: We used the two-round RAND/UCLA panel method to rate indications of harmful (presence of problems), hazardous (at risk for problems), and nonhazardous (no known risks) drinking in older adults. Results from the panel provided guidelines for classifying older individuals as harmful, hazardous, or nonhazardous drinkers, using a survey. The classifications yielded unexpectedly high numbers of harmful and hazardous drinkers. We hypothesized possible misclassifications of drinking risks and used the survey data to identify indications that may have led to invalid ratings. We modified problematic indications and asked three clinician panelists to evaluate the clinical usefulness of the modifications in a third panel round. We revised the indications based on panelist response and reexamined drinking classifications., Results: Using the original indications, 48% of drinkers in the sample were classified as harmful, 31% as hazardous, and 21% as nonhazardous. A review of the indications revealed framing bias in the original rating task and vague definitions of certain symptoms and conditions. The modified indications resulted in classifications of 22% harmful, 47% hazardous, and 31% nonhazardous drinkers., Conclusions: Analysis of survey data led to identification and correction of specific errors occurring during the panel-rating process. The validity of the RAND/UCLA method can be enhanced using data-driven modifications.

Most geriatric assessment instruments have been developed in the English language. Translated versions might differ in their psychometric properties. We analyzed the test-retest reliability and internal consistency of a German instrument for multidimensional geriatric assessment that was based on a newly developed English version. A group of 100 over 75-year-old community-dwelling persons (mean age 83.0 years, 81% women) in Hamburg (n = 26) and Ulm (n = 51), Germany, and Berne (n = 23), Switzerland was interviewed twice by the same trained interviewers with a one week interval. We administered questions on general health, chronic disorders, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, urinary incontinence, nutrition, falls, pain, the social support/network and preventive care measures. In addition, the Functional Status Questionnaire, the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly, the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index, the Visual Function Questionnaire, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly and the Geriatric Depression Scale were administered. Cohen's kappa was good to excellent (0.64 < or = kappa < or = 0.89) with only three exceptions (pain questions, kappa = 0.53; questions on preventive care services, kappa = 0.51; and one of the questions on recent falls, kappa = 0.44). Cronbach alpha (internal consistency) was good to excellent for all domains (0.76 < or = alpha < or = 0.95). The study results confirm good test-retest reliability of the German version of this multidimensional geriatric assessment instrument. Adapted versions of this instrument can be used for different purposes, e.g., preventive home visits, outpatient geriatric assessments or epidemiological studies in older persons.

Background: Pain is a multidimensional experience that should be evaluated beyond an estimate of intensity. A multidimensional pain measure has not been developed for older persons undergoing comprehensive geriatric assessment., Objective: To develop and evaluate validity and reliability of a multidimensional pain assessment instrument for older persons., Research Design: A series of steps in instrument development and evaluation., Subjects: A total of 176 subjects (mean age 84 +/- 6.0 years) in ambulatory geriatric clinics; 64% were women, and 73% had a history of chronic pain., Measurements: Measurements included the Geriatric Pain Measure (GPM), the McGill Pain Questionnaire, Yesavage GDS, Katz ADLs, Lawton IADLs, Tinetti Gait and Balance, Folstein MMSE, and other demographic and clinical characteristics from interview and chart review., Results: The GPM demonstrated a standardized alpha = 0.9445, homogeneity ratio =0.457, and average inter-item correlation =0.415. A subgroup of 50 subjects demonstrated concurrent validity of the GPM in comparison with the McGill Pain Questionnaire (Pearson's r correlation 0.6269 (P < .0000). Test-retest reliability was demonstrated in another subgroup of 50 subjects who repeated the GPM within 48 to 72 hours (Pearson's r = 0.9018; P < .0000). Factor analysis revealed five clusters of components: Pain Intensity, Disengagement, Pain with Ambulation, Pain with Strenuous Activities, and Pain with Other Activities., Conclusions: The GPM is a 24-item questionnaire that is easy to administer and has significant validity and reliability in older persons with multiple medical problems. The GPM may be a useful addition to the multidimensional geriatric assessment process.

Background: In-home preventive visits with multidimensional geriatric assessments can delay the onset of disabilities in older people., Methods: This was a stratified randomized trial. There were 791 participants, community-dwelling people in Bern, Switzerland, older than 75 years. The participants' risk status was based on 6 baseline predictors of functional deterioration. The intervention consisted of annual multidimensional assessments and quarterly follow-up in-home visits by 3 public health nurses (nurses A, B, and C), who, in collaboration with geriatricians, evaluated problems, gave recommendations, facilitated adherence with recommendations, and provided health education. Each nurse was responsible for conducting the home visits in 1 ZIP code area., Results: After 3 years, surviving participants at low baseline risk in the intervention group were less dependent in instrumental activities of daily living (ADL) compared with controls (odds ratio, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-1.0; P = .04). Among subjects at high baseline risk, there were no favorable intervention effects on ADL and an unfavorable increase in nursing home admissions (P= .02). Despite the similar health status of subjects, nurse C identified fewer problems in the subjects who were visited compared with those assessed by nurses A and B. Subgroup analysis revealed that among low-risk subjects visited by nurses A and B, the intervention had favorable effects on instrumental ADL (P = .005) and basic ADL (P = .009), reduced nursing home admissions (P = .004), and resulted in net cost savings in the third year (US $1403 per person per year). Among low-risk subjects visited by nurse C, the intervention had no favorable effects., Conclusions: These data suggest that this intervention can reduce disabilities among elderly people at low risk but not among those at high risk for functional impairment, and that these effects are likely related to the home visitor's performance in conducting the visits.

Preventive home visits with multidimensional geriatric assessment have been shown to delay or prevent the onset of disability and reduce nursing home admissions in older people. The purpose of the present study was to develop and test a multidimensional instrument for in-home preventive assessments in older persons. In developing the instrument, we conducted a systematic literature review of risk factors for functional status decline and of appropriate instruments for measuring these risk factors. Based on an Expert Panel using a modified Delphi process [1] the risk factor domains for functional status decline were chosen, [2] the instruments for evaluating each of the included risk factor domains were selected, and [3] the individual instruments were combined into one comprehensive assessment instrument. A German language version of the original English version of the instrument was developed based on translation, backtranslation, and cultural adaptation. The feasibility of use of the new instrument was evaluated in a field test in 150 people aged 75 years and older in Hamburg, Ulm, Germany, and Bern, Switzerland. The instrument was well accepted by the older persons. The prevalence of risk factors for functional status decline in these populations (e.g., physical inactivity, urinary incontinence, vision impairment) was high. There was also a high prevalence of underuse of preventive care measures (e.g., no pneumococcal vaccination in over 95 percent of persons). These preliminary results support the possible usefulness of this instrument for conducting preventive home visits or for epidemiological purposes (e.g., prevention surveillance). In a next phase, the test-retest reliability of the instrument, and the feasibility and reliability of self-administration as compared to interviewer administration will be described in a separate paper.

In an earlier study we have shown good internal consistency and test-retest-reliability of a newly developed German-language instrument in the interviewer-administered version. The aim of this study was to test the reliability of a self-administered version compared to the original interviewer-administered version of our newly developed German-language instrument. We recruited a group of 50 over 75-year-old community-dwelling persons in Hamburg, Germany (N = 25) and Berne, Switzerland (N = 25). The questionnaire contains items on: self-perceived health, chronic conditions, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, urinary incontinence, nutrition, recent falls, pain, the social support/network and preventive-care measures. In addition, the Functional Status Questionnaire, the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly, the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index, the Visual Function Questionnaire, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly and the Geriatric Depression Scale were administered. Cohen's Kappa (self-administered version compared to the interviewer-administered version) was good to excellent (0.69-1.0) with only three exceptions (physical activity kappa = 0.49, basic activities kappa = 0.54 and oral health kappa = 0.54). For the domains activities of daily living, oral health, visual function and depression the self-administered version detected significantly more problems than the interview. In the future the self-administered version of this assessment instrument can be used for various purposes, e.g. (annual) preventive geriatric assessment for outpatients and other community-dwelling persons and epidemiological studies in older persons.

Objectives: To determine whether preventive in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) prevents functional decline in community-dwelling older persons with different baseline functional status: (1) without any basic activities of daily living (BADL) dependency at baseline; and (2) without any instrumental ADL (IADL) and basic ADL dependency at baseline., Design: Subgroup analyses of a 3-year randomized controlled trial., Setting: The city of Santa Monica, California., Participants: Participants came from the original population (n = 414) of community-living older persons aged 75 years and older who participated in a trial testing the effectiveness of annual preventive in-home CGA. For the first subgroup analysis, we excluded subjects (n = 27) who were dependent in one or more BADL before randomization (final sample size, n = 387); for the second subgroup analysis, we excluded 93 additional subjects who were dependent in one or more IADL before randomization (final sample size, n = 294)., Intervention: Annual preventive in-home CGA, with quarterly home visits by gerontologic nurse practitioners, for 3 years., Measurements: Functional status data were collected through yearly in-home interviews by independent observers. Subjects were classified as (1) independent in both BADL and IADL, (2) dependent in IADL but independent in BADL, or (3) dependent in both IADL and BADL., Results: In both subgroup analyses, there was no difference in survival between intervention and control subjects. In the subgroup with no BADL impairment at baseline, intervention subjects spent significantly fewer days dependent in both BADL and IADL during each year of the study (5 days vs 14 days, P = .022; 13 vs 33, P = .016; and 19 vs 44, P = .014 for years 1, 2, and 3, respectively) and over all 3 years combined (36 days vs 92 days, P = .016) in bivariate analyses. In multivariate analyses, the intervention reduced time spent in complete (BADL and IADL) dependency (P = .028). In the subgroup of subjects without any IADL or BADL impairment at baseline, no significant differences were apparent in the number of days spent in complete independence and days spent in complete dependency. Intervention group subjects spent more days in partial dependency during Year 1 (24 days vs 9 days, P = .021), but the difference was not significant during Year 2 (47 vs 29, P = .088), Year 3 (49 vs 41, P = .370), and over all 3 years combined (120 vs 79, P = .123) as well as in multivariate analysis (P = .062)., Conclusion: These findings support the hypothesis that in-home preventive visits delay the onset of disability in people without initial BADL impairment. Further studies in larger samples are needed to determine optimal intervention strategies and effectiveness among well functioning older people.

Background: Current paradigms for conceptualizing alcohol-related problems typically focus on persons who are abusing or dependent on alcohol. These paradigms may not apply to older drinkers whose alcohol use, regardless of consumption-level, can cause problems because of age-related changes in physiology and interactions with increased morbidity, medication use, and functional limitations., Objective: We convened an expert panel# to develop clinical indications of harmful, hazardous, and nonhazardous drinking in persons 65 years of age and older., Research Design and Subjects: Nine panelists with expertise in psychiatry, geriatrics, internal medicine, and alcohol research were provided with epidemiological data and a published explicit literature review of alcohol use in the elderly. The RAND/UCLA two-round panel method was used to develop the indications. After the second round, the authors wrote a draft statement that was circulated to the panelists whose comments were incorporated into a final document., Results: Panelists agreed on 215 scenarios in which older peoples' use of alcohol either alone or in the presence of chronic medical conditions, medication use, symptoms, smoking, and functional limitations are hazardous or harmful. Panelists' ratings of risk did not differ significantly between persons aged 65 to 74 years and those aged 75 years and older., Conclusion: Alcohol use may be hazardous or harmful for older persons, particularly in conjunction with physical or emotional illnesses, medication use, functional limitations, smoking, and driving after drinking. When asking about alcohol use in older persons, clinicians need to be aware of these factors to assist in identifying and managing potential or actual alcohol-related problems.

To lay the groundwork for devising, improving and implementing strategies to prevent or delay the onset of disability in the elderly, we conducted a systematic literature review of longitudinal studies published between 1985 and 1997 that reported statistical associations between individual base-line risk factors and subsequent functional status in community-living older persons. Functional status decline was defined as disability or physical function limitation. We used MEDLINE, PSYCINFO, SOCA, EMBASE, bibliographies and expert consultation to select the articles, 78 of which met the selection criteria. Risk factors were categorized into 14 domains and coded by two independent abstractors. Based on the methodological quality of the statistical analyses between risk factors and functional outcomes (e.g. control for base-line functional status, control for confounding, attrition rate), the strength of evidence was derived for each risk factor. The association of functional decline with medical findings was also analyzed. The highest strength of evidence for an increased risk in functional status decline was found for (alphabetical order) cognitive impairment, depression, disease burden (comorbidity), increased and decreased body mass index, lower extremity functional limitation, low frequency of social contacts, low level of physical activity, no alcohol use compared to moderate use, poor self-perceived health, smoking and vision impairment. The review revealed that some risk factors (e.g. nutrition, physical environment) have been neglected in past research. This review will help investigators set priorities for future research of the Disablement Process, plan health and social services for elderly persons and develop more cost-effective programs for preventing disability among them.

Objective: To examine the association between chronic illness and functional status change during a 3-year period in older people enrolled in an in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and preventive care program., Design: Secondary analysis of data from a longitudinal cohort study., Setting: Santa Monica, California., Participants: Two hundred two community-dwelling older persons (mean age at baseline was 81 years, 70% were women, and 72% reported good health) randomized to the intervention group in a trial of in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment and preventive care., Measurements: We studied 13 common chronic illnesses/conditions determined clinically from an annual comprehensive evaluation by gerontologic nurse practitioners (GNPs) in consultation with study geriatricians. These target conditions included hypertension, osteoarthritis, coronary artery disease, obesity, undernutrition, urinary incontinence, sleep disorders, falls, gait/balance disorders, hearing and vision deficits, depression, and unsafe home environment. The dependent variable was functional change as measured by instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and basic activities of daily living (BADL) assessed at baseline and annually for 3 years by independent research personnel. Potential confounding variables, including comorbid conditions and other subject characteristics, were controlled for in the analyses., Results: Although functional status was similar at baseline, the presence of certain target conditions in this sample was associated significantly with functional decline in IADL and BADL during the 3-year period. Four conditions (gait/balance disorders, depression, unsafe home environment, and coronary artery disease) were associated with significant declines in IADL, and four conditions (gait/balance disorders, depression, hypertension, and urinary incontinence) were associated with significant declines in BADL. Conversely, subjects with obesity had no significant change in IADL or BADL throughout the study period and had less decline in IADL compared with nonobese subjects., Conclusions: Certain chronic conditions, particularly gait/balance disorders and depression, are associated with significant decline in functional status in older persons who receive CGA. These findings may help identify older persons at risk for greatest functional decline despite participation in CGA and may also suggest the need for more effective intervention strategies in these individuals.

Objectives: To describe the process of care of a program of in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and to determine: (1) if there are major findings in all domains of CGA (medical, functional, mental health, and social/ environmental), (2) if there is a continued clinical yield when CGA is repeated annually, and (3) factors that affect patient adherence with recommendations from CGA., Design: Descriptive prospective study of subjects allocated to the intervention group of a 3-year randomized trial of preventive in-home CGA., Setting: Homes of participants living in an urban setting., Participants: Persons aged 75 years or older and living at home who received the intervention (N = 202 subjects, mean age 80.8 years, 70% female, 95% white, 64% living alone)., Intervention: Annual in-home CGA and quarterly home visits by gerontologic nurse practitioners for 3 years., Measurements: Detailed data were collected prospectively on clinical problems detected by CGA, and specific recommendations were made for these problems using an instrument developed explicitly for this project to study the CGA process. Subject adherence with these recommendations was also recorded., Results: Major problems were identified in all domains of CGA; the most common problems were medical. In the first year, 76.7% of subjects had at least one major problem identified that was either previously unknown or suboptimally treated. One-third of subjects had additional major problems identified during the second and third years. A constant number of therapeutic and preventive recommendations was made each year (11.5 per subject annually). Subject adherence varied by type of recommendation (ANOVA, F = 108.4, P < .001); adherence was better for referrals to a physician than for referrals to a non-physician professional or community service or for recommendations involving self-care activities (Scheffe's test, P < .001)., Conclusion: In these community-dwelling older people, there was a continued yield of problems identified and recommendations made when CGA was repeated annually for 3 years, supporting the practice of repeat CGA in older people in the community. Subject adherence with recommendations from CGA varied by type of recommendation, but further work is needed to determine additional factors that affect this adherence and to determine the association between the yield of CGA (i.e., problems identified, recommendations given and adherence with these recommendations) and important clinical outcomes.

The purpose of this project is to develop a health risk appraisal for the elderly (HRA-E) and test its application in both medical and nonmedical settings. The HRA-E system consists of a questionnaire and software for computer-generation of personalized reports to participants, 55 years and older, and their physicians. Items in the questionnaire cover a comprehensive range of content domains relevant to health promotion in the elderly. The goal of the HRA-E system is to prevent functional decline. Samples of eligible subjects from the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), a group practice, and a senior center were extended invitations to participate. Those responding affirmatively to the invitation were given a questionnaire and evaluation form. Each person who returned the questionnaire received his or her personal report and a second evaluation form. Four months after receiving their reports, respondents were questioned about behavior changes during the interim. Preliminary findings, based on 1895 respondents, indicate that nearly all participants found the questionnaire easy to complete and were pleased with its overall length. In addition, most participants read their reports, and many planned to take action, based on report recommendations. In the next phase of this project, the intent is to refine the questionnaire, extend the intervention protocols for longitudinal application, and evaluate its impact on health-related behaviors, medical care utilization, and functional decline.

Given that the assessment of multiple dimensions of health/well-being can create respondent burden, assessment scales that are both effective and brief hold great attraction. In this study, we used Cronbach's alpha and correlational methods, including factor analysis, to evaluate the performance of four short scales measuring psychosocial aspects of well-being (depression, quality of life, sense of coherence, social support) in two samples of community-dwelling persons aged 75 and over (n = 414, n = 50). All four scales exhibited good range, high internal consistency, strong temporal reliability, and reasonable levels of construct validity. We conclude that they are practical contributors to measuring health in community-based older adults.

Background and Methods: The prevention of disability in elderly people poses a challenge for health care and social services. We conducted a three-year, randomized, controlled trial of the effect of annual in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment and follow-up for people living in the community who were 75 years of age or older. The 215 people in the intervention group were seen at home by gerontologic nurse practitioners who, in collaboration with geriatricians, evaluated problems and risk factors for disability, gave specific recommendations, and provided health education. The 199 people in the control group received their regular medical care. The main outcome measures were the prevention of disability, defined as the need for assistance in performing the basic activities of daily living (bathing, dressing, feeding, grooming, transferring from bed to chair, and moving around inside the house) or the instrumental activities of daily living (e.g., cooking, handling finances and medication, housekeeping, and shopping), and the prevention of nursing home admissions., Results: At three years, 20 people in the intervention group (12 percent of 170 surviving participants) and 32 in the control group (22 percent of 147 surviving participants) required assistance in performing the basic activities of daily living (adjusted odds ratio, 0.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 0.8; P = 0.02). The number of persons who were dependent on assistance in performing the instrumental activities of daily living but not the basic activities did not differ significantly between the two groups. Nine people in the intervention group (4 percent) and 20 in the control group (10 percent) were permanently admitted to nursing homes (P = 0.02). Acute care hospital admissions and short-term nursing home admissions did not differ significantly between the two groups. In the second and third years of the study, there were significantly more visits to physicians among the participants in the intervention group than among those in the control group (mean number of visits per month, 1.41 in year 2 and 1.27 in year 3 in the intervention group, as compared with 1.11 and 0.92 visits, respectively, in the control group; P = 0.007 and P = 0.001, respectively). The cost of the intervention for each year of disability-free life gained was about $46,000., Conclusions: A program of in-home comprehensive geriatric assessments can delay the development of disability and reduce permanent nursing home stays among elderly people living at home.

Objectives: To study the cooperation of primary care physicians with a community-based prevention and health promotion program for older persons, to study physician factors related to cooperation, and to determine any relationship between physician cooperation and patient adherence to program recommendations and patient satisfaction with health care., Design and Setting: A survey administered in subjects' homes and physicians' offices in Santa Monica, California., Participants: Patients (n = 81) were intervention group subjects in a 3-year, randomized, controlled trial of in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment paired with prevention and health promotion. Physicians (n = 50) were selected if they had been contacted at least once by a study nurse practitioner about one of these patients., Measurements: Physician cooperation was rated by study nurse practitioners. Physicians were interviewed to identify factors associated with cooperation. Patients' satisfaction with health care and adherence were measured prospectively throughout the 3-year program., Main Results: Physicians exhibiting better cooperation had fewer years in practice (P = .03) and were more likely to discuss the program with their patients (P = .005), see benefit for their patients from the program (P = .02), and rate program information as useful (P = .002). Higher physician cooperation did not predict higher patient satisfaction (P = .23) but did predict higher patient adherence to program recommendations (P = .02)., Conclusions: Physicians rated as cooperative were more likely to have a positive appraisal of the program, and their patients had higher adherence to program recommendations. These findings suggest that strategies for increasing primary care physician cooperation might improve effectiveness of similar community-based prevention and health promotion programs.

Previous controlled studies have shown that preventive home visits are a promising method for disability prevention in elderly persons; however, due to the lack of data on cost effectiveness and optimal intervention methods, there is still debate on their usefulness. Therefore, additional controlled studies must use new methods to resolve these unanswered issues. We present a novel approach used in the project EIGER (Evaluation of In-Home Geriatric Health Visits in Elderly Residents), an ongoing randomized controlled trial of preventive home visits in community-residing persons aged 75 years and older in Bern, Switzerland. The intervention consists of in-home visits with structured comprehensive geriatric assessment and follow-up by specially trained nurses who collaborate with geriatricians and an interdisciplinary team. Special methods were used to optimize the sample size, to improve the health care cost analysis, to minimize and explore refusal to participate, to apply stratified randomization for subgroup analysis, and to evaluate the intervention process with a tracer method. Selected baseline findings (N = 791, mean age 82 years, 73% female) include uncontrolled systolic hypertension (54%), balance/gait disorder (9%), cognitive impairment (7%), 6 or more medications (21%), depressive symptoms (10%), and impaired basic ADL (15%). Baseline findings demonstrate that this study is likely to contribute to some of the unresolved issues of in-home prevention for older persons.

Background: Although many studies describe benefits from the comprehensive assessment of elderly patients by an interdisciplinary team (comprehensive geriatric assessment), the most supportive evidence for the process has come from programs that rely on specialized inpatient units and long hospital stays. We examined whether an inpatient geriatric consultation service might also be beneficial in a trial involving four medical centers of a group-practice health maintenance organization (HMO)., Methods: We conducted a randomized clinical trial with 2353 hospitalized patients 65 years of age or older in whom at least 1 of 13 screening criteria were present: stroke, immobility, impairment in any basic activity of daily living, malnutrition, incontinence, confusion or dementia, prolonged bed rest, recent falls, depression, social or family problems, an unplanned readmission to the hospital within three months of a previous hospital stay, a new fracture, and age of 80 years or older. Of the 1337 patients assigned to the experimental group, 1261 (94 percent) received a comprehensive geriatric assessment in the form of a consultation, with limited follow-up; the 1016 patients assigned to the control group received usual care. The functional and health status of the patients was measured at base line and 3 and 12 months later; survival was assessed at 12 months. Subgroups of patients who might be presumed to benefit from comprehensive assessment were also studied., Results: The survival rate at 12 months was 74 percent in the experimental group and 75 percent in the control group. At base line, 3 months, and 12 months the scores of the two groups on measures of functional and health status were similar. The analysis of 16 subgroups did not identify any with either clearly improved functional status or improved survival., Conclusions: In this HMO, comprehensive geriatric assessment by a consultation team, with limited follow-up, did not improve the health or survival of hospitalized patients selected on the basis of screening criteria.

Objective: To describe the evaluation of an interdisciplinary comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) consultation program for targeted hospitalized patients., Design: Multi-center randomized clinical trial (RCT) at four hospitals where patients were randomly assigned to CGA consultation or usual care by the attending physician, and a non-equivalent control group (NCG) at two hospitals., Setting: Six hospitals in a multi-specialty group practice model health maintenance organization (HMO)., Participants: 3593 patients age 65 years or older meeting at least one of 13 inclusionary criteria at admission., Intervention: Screening by hospital staff and standardized CGA consultation conducted by a nurse practitioner, social worker, and geriatrician at the four RCT hospitals., Main Outcome Measures: Functional and health status, mortality, rehospitalization, and cost-effectiveness of the CGA program at 1 year post-randomization; validation of targeting (inclusionary) criteria that identify subgroups of patients deriving benefit from CGA; and physician contamination (learning from CGA and changing treatment provided to control patients)., Conclusions: A number of methodological issues need to be considered when conducting effectiveness trials of CGA. The concurrent design of a multi-center RCT, coupled with the NCG to determine physician contamination, is an innovative approach intended to determine more precisely the cost-effectiveness of CGA for frail hospitalized elderly persons. The large and heterogeneous patient population and the broad array of inclusionary criteria will permit the evaluation of the benefit of CGA for subgroups. All these features are intended to enhance the generalizability of study results.

Objective: To determine the yield of standardized targeting criteria for identifying hospitalized HMO patients who are at high risk for mortality and nursing home placement and, therefore, may be appropriate for comprehensive geriatric assessment., Design: Prospective cohort study., Setting: Four HMO (Southern California Kaiser-Permanente) hospitals., Subjects: 3,697 patients 65 years of age or older admitted to any inpatient service from July 1 through September 30, 1990., Main Outcome Measures: Screening measures for standardized targeting criteria, administered 24-48 hours after admission., Results: Overall, 35.1% of patients screened met at least one inclusionary criterion, which is considerably higher than other published reports. The most commonly met criteria were incontinence, impairment in performing activities of daily living, malnutrition, and immobility. The percentage of patients meeting at least one criterion and meeting each criterion varied considerably among hospitals. The vast majority of patients (83%) who were judged appropriate for assessment met at least three criteria., Conclusions: The yield of standardized criteria differs when applied to patients in different health care systems and to patients at different hospitals within a health care system, which may reflect differences in the populations being served and the practice styles of physicians and the delivery system. Because no single criterion identified more than approximately half of patients who were judged appropriate for assessment, it is likely that a battery of criteria will be necessary to identify these patients.