Search

Background: the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS-GMS) recommendations for training in Geriatric Medicine were published in 1993. The practice of Geriatric Medicine has developed considerably since then and it has therefore become necessary to update these recommendations., Methods: under the auspices of the UEMS-GMS, the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EuGMS) and the European Academy of Medicine of Ageing (EAMA), a group of experts, representing all member states of the respective bodies developed a new framework for education and training of specialists in Geriatric Medicine using a modified Delphi technique. Thirty-two expert panel members from 30 different countries participated in the process comprising three Delphi rounds for consensus. The process was led by five facilitators., Results: the final recommendations include four different domains: 'General Considerations' on the structure and aim of the syllabus as well as quality indicators for training (6 sub-items), 'Knowledge in patient care' (36 sub-items), 'Additional Skills and Attitude required for a Geriatrician' (9 sub-items) and a domain on 'Assessment of postgraduate education: which items are important for the transnational comparison process' (1 item)., Conclusion: the current publication describes the development of the new recommendations endorsed by UEMS-GMS, EuGMS and EAMA as minimum training requirements to become a geriatrician at specialist level in EU member states., (© The Author(s) (2019). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Purpose: To update the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) 2005 recommendations on geriatric assessment (GA) in older patients with cancer., Methods: SIOG composed a panel with expertise in geriatric oncology to develop consensus statements after literature review of key evidence on the following topics: rationale for performing GA; findings from a GA performed in geriatric oncology patients; ability of GA to predict oncology treatment–related complications; association between GA findings and overall survival (OS); impact of GA findings on oncology treatment decisions; composition of a GA, including domains and tools; and methods for implementing GA in clinical care., Results: GA can be valuable in oncology practice for following reasons: detection of impairment not identified in routine history or physical examination, ability to predict severe treatment-related toxicity, ability to predict OS in a variety of tumors and treatment settings, and ability to influence treatment choice and intensity. The panel recommended that the following domains be evaluated in a GA: functional status, comorbidity, cognition, mental health status, fatigue, social status and support, nutrition, and presence of geriatric syndromes. Although several combinations of tools and various models are available for implementation of GA in oncology practice, the expert panel could not endorse one over another., Conclusion: There is mounting data regarding the utility of GA in oncology practice; however, additional research is needed to continue to strengthen the evidence base.

Unlabelled: Frailty tends to be considered as a major risk for adverse outcomes in older persons, but some important aspects remain matter of debate., Objectives: The purpose of this paper is to present expert's positions on the main aspects of the frailty syndrome in the older persons., Participants: Workshop organized by International Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics (IAGG), World Health Organization (WHO) and Société Française de Gériatrie et de Gérontologie (SFGG)., Results: Frailty is widely recognized as an important risk factor for adverse health outcomes in older persons. This can be of particular value in evaluating non-disabled older persons with chronic diseases but today no operational definition has been established. Nutritional status, mobility, activity, strength, endurance, cognition, and mood have been proposed as markers of frailty. Another approach calculates a multidimensional score ranging from "very fit" to "severely frail", but it is difficult to apply into the medical practice. Frailty appears to be secondary to multiple conditions using multiple pathways leading to a vulnerability to a stressor. Biological (inflammation, loss of hormones), clinical (sarcopenia, osteoporosis etc.), as well as social factors (isolation, financial situation) are involved in the vulnerability process. In clinical practice, detection of frailty is of major interest in oncology because of the high prevalence of cancer in older persons and the bad tolerance of the drug therapies. Presence of frailty should also be taken into account in the definition of the cardiovascular risks in the older population. The experts of the workshop have listed the points reached an agreement and those must to be a priority for improving understanding and use of frailty syndrome in practice., Conclusion: Frailty in older adults is a syndrome corresponding to a vulnerability to a stressor. Diagnostic tools have been developed but none can integrate at the same time the large spectrum of factors and the simplicity asked by the clinical practice. An agreement with an international common definition is necessary to develop screening and to reduce the morbidity in older persons.

Background: As more and more cancers occur in elderly people, oncologists are increasingly confronted with the necessity of integrating geriatric parameters in the treatment of their patients., Methods: The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) created a task force to review the evidence on the use of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in cancer patients. A systematic review of the evidence was conducted., Results: Several biological and clinical correlates of aging have been identified. Their relative weight and clinical usefulness is still poorly defined. There is strong evidence that a CGA detects many problems missed by a regular assessment in general geriatric and in cancer patients. There is also strong evidence that a CGA improves function and reduces hospitalization in the elderly. There is heterogeneous evidence that it improves survival and that it is cost-effective. There is corroborative evidence from a few studies conducted in cancer patients. Screening tools exist and were successfully used in settings such as the emergency room, but globally were poorly tested. The article contains recommendations for the use of CGA in research and clinical care for older cancer patients., Conclusions: A CGA, with or without screening, and with follow-up, should be used in older cancer patients, in order to detect unaddressed problems, improve their functional status, and possibly their survival. The task force cannot recommend any specific tool or approach above others at this point and general geriatric experience should be used.

Maxime Billot,1,2 Riccardo Calvani,3,4 Annele Urtamo,5 Juan Luis Sánchez-Sánchez,6 Cecilia Ciccolari-Micaldi,1 Milan Chang,7,8 Regina Roller-Wirnsberger,9 Gerhard Wirnsberger,10 Alan Sinclair,11 Nieves Vaquero-Pinto,12 Satu Jyväkorpi,5 Hanna Öhman,5 Timo Strandberg,13,14 Jos MGA Schols,15 Annemie MWJ Schols,16 Nick Smeets,17 Eva Topinkova,18 Helena Michalkova,19 Anna Rita Bonfigli,20 Fabrizia Lattanzio,20 Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas,21 Hélio Coelho-Júnior,4 Marianna Broccatelli,4 Maria Elena D’Elia,4 Damiano Biscotti,4 Emanuele Marzetti,3,4 Ellen Freiberger22 1Clinical Gerontology, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France; 2PRISMATICS (Predictive Research in Spine/Neurostimulation Management and Thoracic Innovation in Cardiac Surgery), Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France; 3Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy; 4Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "Agostino Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy; 5University of Helsinki, Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Unit of Primary Health Care, Helsinki, Finland; 6Foundation for Biomedical Research Getafe University Hospital, Madrid, Spain; 7Faculty of Health Promotion, Sports and Leisure Studies, School of Education, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland; 8The Icelandic Gerontological Research Center, Landspitali University Hospital and University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland; 9Medical University of Graz, Department of Internal Medicine, Graz, Austria; 10Medical University of Graz, Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Graz, Austria; 11Foundation for Diabetes Research in Older People, Diabetes Frail Ltd., Luton, UK; 12University Hospital of Ramon Cajal IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain; 13University of Helsinki, Clinicum, Helsinki, Finland; Helsinki University Hospital, Medicine and Rehabilitation, Helsinki, Finland; 14University of Oulu, Center for Life Course Health Research, Oulu, Finland; 15Department of Health Services Research, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands; 16Department of Respiratory Medicine, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism (NUTRIM), Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands; 17Department of Health & Fitness, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands; 18 First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic; 19Faculty of Social and Health Sciences, South Bohemian University, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic; 20Scientific Direction, IRCCS INRCA, Ancona, Italy; 21Geriatrics Service, University Hospital of Getafe, Madrid, Spain; 22Institute for Biomedicine of Aging, FAU Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg, GermanyCorrespondence: Maxime Billot CHU De Poitiers, PRISMATICS (Predictive Research in Spine/Neurostimulation Management and Thoracic Innovation in Cardiac Surgery)Poitiers University Hospital, 2 Rue De La Miléterie, Poitiers 86021, FranceTel +33 549 443 224Email maxime.billot2@gmail.comAbstract: One of the most widely conserved hallmarks of aging is a decline in functional capabilities. Mobility loss is particularly burdensome due to its association with negative health outcomes, loss of independence and disability, and the heavy impact on quality of life. Recently, a new condition, physical frailty and sarcopenia, has been proposed to define a critical stage in the disabling cascade. Physical frailty and sarcopenia are characterized by weakness, slowness, and reduced muscle mass, yet with preserved ability to move independently. One of the strategies that have shown some benefits in combatting mobility loss and its consequences for older adults is physical activity. Here, we describe the opportunities and challenges for the development of physical activity interventions in people with physical frailty and sarcopenia. The aim of this article is to review age-related physio(patho)logical changes that impact mobility in old age and to provide recommendations and procedures in accordance with the available literature.Keywords: physical exercise, muscle mass, strength, walking, balance, better aging

Abstract: Quality of geriatric care depends on institutional resources e.g. hospitals, medical departments engaged in acute medicine, rehabilitation and long term care but especially in quality and quantity of well educated and trained specialists, i.e. “geriatricians”. This survey initiated by the Academic Board of the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS) aimed to give an European overview by mapping the current situation in number and geographical distribution of geriatricians in relation to national demographic data. The discussion focuses on special national aspects including information about the national training tenure circumstances as well as political and historical influences on the geriatric care situation. The need for an European consensus concerning training curriculum is clearly stated, but also the need for fostering geriatric medicine with look on the demographic background, which is very similar in European countries. Last but not least: The survey can function as a benchmark, which every country may use in it''s own medical and political environment. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]