Search

Background: Frailty is a condition of increasing importance, given the aging adult population. With an anticipated shortage of geriatricians, primary care physicians will increasingly need to manage care for frail adults with complex functional risks and social-economic circumstances., Methods: We used cross-sectional data from 4551 adults ages 65-90 who responded to the 2014/2015 cycle of the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Member Health Survey (MHS), a self-administered survey that covers multiple health and social characteristics, to create a deficits accumulation model frailty index, classify respondents as frail or non-frail, and then compare prevalence of functional health issues including Activities of Daily Living (ADL)/Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) and social determinants of health (SDOHs) by frailty status., Results: The overall prevalence of frailty was 14.3%, higher for women than men, increased with age, and more common among those with low levels of education and income. Frail older adults were more likely than non-frail to have ≥ 3 chronic diseases (55.9% vs. 10.1%), obesity (32.7% vs. 22.8%), insomnia (36.4% vs. 8.8%), oral health problems (25.1% vs. 4.7%), balance or walking problems (54.2% vs. 4.9%), ≥ 1 fall (56.1% vs. 19.7%), to use ≥ 1 medication known to increase fall risk (56.7% vs. 26.0%), and to need help with ≥2 ADLs (15.8% vs. 0.8%) and ≥ 2 IADLs (38.4% vs. 0.8%). They were more likely to feel financial strain (26.9% vs. 12.6%) and to use less medication than prescribed (7.4% vs. 3.6%), less medical care than needed (8.3% vs 3.7%), and eat less produce (9.5% vs. 3.2%) due to cost. Nearly 20% of frail adults were unpaid caregivers for an adult with frailty, serious illness or disability., Conclusions: This study examined the prevalence of frailty and identified modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors of health. The frail older adult population is heterogeneous and requires a patient-centered assessment of their circumstances by healthcare providers and caregivers to improve their quality of life, avoid adverse health events, and slow physical and mental decline. The characteristics identified in this study can be proactively used for the assessment of patient health, quality of life, and frailty prevention.

Objectives: To examine contemporary trends in mortality following hip fracture among older postmenopausal women in an integrated healthcare delivery system., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study of 13,550 women aged ≥65 years with hip fracture during 2000 to 2010., Methods: Demographic factors, comorbidity index score, fracture history, early rehospitalization, and all-cause mortality within 1 year following hip fracture were examined using health plan databases and records. Temporal trends, risk factors, and the association of race/ethnicity and mortality within 1 year post fracture were examined using multivariable logistic regression., Results: Among 13,550 women with hip fracture, 84.6% were aged ≥75 years: 83.6% were white, 2.8% black, 5.6% Hispanic, 4.5% Asian, and 3.5% of other/unknown race. Following hip fracture, 2.4% died during the index hospitalization, while 12.3% were rehospitalized within 30 days of discharge. Infection, pneumonia, and cardiovascular conditions were the most common nonorthopedic indications for readmission. Mortality rates at 6 months (17%) and 1 year (22.8%) following hip fracture were high and increased with age. Greater comorbidity and early rehospitalization were associated with increased mortality risk, while Asian and Hispanic race/ethnicity were associated with lower mortality risk (vs white). Temporal trends demonstrated a small but significant reduction in mortality risk during 2004 to 2010., Conclusions: While hip fracture morbidity and mortality remain high, temporal trends suggest recent declines in mortality risk, with risk of death following hip fracture lower for Asian and Hispanic women. Future studies should examine potential benefits of targeted interventions within integrated healthcare settings and factors contributing to observed racial/ethnic differences in post fracture survival.

Change in any form creates stress on systems, yet there is growing awareness within the health care field that change must come as cost-conscious insurers and employers refuse to pay for overextended processes that grew out of the charge-based reimbursement era. Short-term solutions, such as discounted charges and staff cuts, are not the answer when the entire system needs an overhaul. The cost of care escalates and the quality of patient care suffers because the system lacks the appropriate mechanisms to reduce redundancy, eliminate waste, improve effectiveness, and provide the high-quality care that a community expects from its hospital. The outcomes-based critical pathway approach discussed here has been used with great success and differs from classic pathway writing in that only elements related to the specific outcome are allowed on the order set. The critical pathway process starts with a review of historical patient records, which yields information about both historical practice patterns and the provider team. Using this information, a work group is formed and patient goals or outcomes are established for the population in question. The entire system is informed and educated, with special attention given to the medical staff, clinical outcome and financial data are developed and provided to individuals in the process, and a feedback loop is established. Cancer care is an attractive target for critical pathways, because it is an area with high cost and expensive technology, and physician practice patterns and patient outcomes can vary widely. On the flip side, the historically multidisciplinary nature of cancer care offers a good starting point for the collaborative culture needed to successfully implement critical pathways. When done right, critical pathways can decrease morbidity and mortality, reduce redundancy and cost, increase patient satisfaction, and improve patient outcomes. Shifting practice and eliminating variation in practice patterns, without regard to best practices and outcomes, could leave an organization compromised by group norms. Few things will sustain the energy needed to keep the hospital culture moving forward. This is not to say that it cannot be done, because it can. The critical pathway process has noticeable energy cycle levels--periods of high energy and low energy. The two hospitals discussed here reveal their painstaking effort to maintain and invigorate a process that would rather wait another day. Carefully selected work group members, reminders to keep individuals from returning to old practice habits, and an established, firm connection between cost and quality will help carry an organization through periods of low energy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)