E. van Rossum

Reducing disability in community-dwelling frail older people: cost-effectiveness study alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND although proactive primary care, including early detection and treatment of community-dwelling frail older people, is a part of the national healthcare policy in several countries, little is known about its cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVE to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a proactive primary care approach in community-dwelling frail older people. DESIGN AND SETTING embedded in a cluster randomised trial among 12 Dutch general practitioner practices, an economic evaluation was performed from a societal perspective with a time horizon of 24 months. METHOD frail older people in the intervention group received an in-home assessment and interdisciplinary care based on a tailor-made treatment plan and regular evaluation and follow-up. Practices in the control group delivered usual care. The primary outcome for the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis was disability and health-related quality of life, respectively. RESULTS multilevel analyses among 346 frail older people showed no significant differences between the groups regarding disability and health-related quality of life at 24 months. People in the intervention group used, as expected, more primary care services, but there was no decline in more expensive hospital and long-term care. Total costs over 24 months tended to be higher in the intervention group than in the control group (€26,503 versus €20,550, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS the intervention under study led to an increase in healthcare utilisation and related costs without providing any beneficial effects. This study adds to the scarce amount of evidence of the cost-effectiveness of proactive primary care in community-dwelling frail older people. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN 31954692.

Validity, reliability and feasibility of tools to identify frail older patients in inpatient hospital care: A systematic review

BackgroundThe objective of this study is to identify and review screening tools for frailty in older adults admitted to inpatient hospital care with respect to their validity, reliability and feasibility.MethodsStudies were identified through systematically searching PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase and PsycINFO and screening reference lists till June 2014. Papers dealing with screening tools aimed at identifying frail older patients in in-hospital care, and including information about validity, reliability or feasibility, were included in the review. The quality of the included studies was critically appraised via the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS).ResultsFrom the originally identified 2001 studies 32 studies met the inclusion criteria, in which 16 screening tools were presented. The screening tools showed different characteristics with respect to the number of items, the method of administration and the domains included. The most frequently studied tools with respect to predictive validity were the Identification Seniors At Risk (ISAR) and Triage Risk Stratification Tool (TRST). Studies retrieved poorer information about reliability and feasibility. Overall sensitivity was fairly good. The ISAR, ISAR-HP (Identification Seniors At Risk Hospitalized Patients) and Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) generally had the best sensitivity.ConclusionsMany screening tools are available for daily practice. These tools to identify frail older patients in inpatient hospital care could be useful. For no tool, however, is clear evidence available yet regarding validity, reliability and feasibility. The overall sensitivity of the included screening tools was fairly good, whereas information on reliability and feasibility was lacking for most tools. In future research more attention should be given to the latter items.

Measuring Grip Strength in Older Adults: Comparing the Grip-ball With the Jamar Dynamometer

Background and Purpose:Decreased grip strength is a predictor of adverse outcomes in older adults. A Grip-ball was developed that can be used for home-based self-monitoring of grip strength to detect decline at an early stage. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of measurements obtained with the Grip-ball in older adults. Methods:Forty nursing home patients and 59 community-dwelling older adults 60 years or older were invited to participate in this study. Grip strength in both hands was measured 3 consecutive times during a single visit using the Grip-ball and the Jamar dynamometer. Test-retest reliability was described using intraclass correlation coefficients. Concurrent validity was evaluated by calculating Pearson correlations between the mean Grip-ball and Jamar dynamometer measurements and between the highest measurements out of 3 trials. Known-groups validity was studied using t tests. Results:Eighty eight participants (33 men) with a mean age of 75 (SD = 6.8) years were included. Intraclass correlation coefficients for the Grip-ball were 0.97 and 0.96 for the left and right hands, respectively (P < .001), and those for the Jamar dynamometer were 0.97 and 0.98 for the left and right hands, respectively (P < .001). Pearson correlations between the mean scores of the Grip-ball and the Jamar dynamometer were 0.71 (P < .001) and 0.76 (P < .001) for the left and right hands, respectively. Pearson correlations between the highest scores out of 3 trials were 0.69 (P < .001) and 0.78 (P < .001) for the left and right hands, respectively. The t tests revealed that both the Grip-ball and the Jamar dynamometer detected grip strength differences between men and women but not between nursing home patients and community-dwelling older adults. Grip-ball measurements did not confirm higher grip strength of the dominant hand whereas the Jamar dynamometer did. Conclusions:The Grip-ball provides reliable grip strength estimates in older adults. Correlations found between the Grip-ball and Jamar dynamometer measurements suggest acceptable concurrent validity. The Grip-ball seems capable of detecting “larger” grip strength differences but might have difficulty detecting “smaller” differences that were detected by the Jamar dynamometer. The Grip-ball could be used in practice to enable home-based self-monitoring of grip strength in older adults. However, for implementation of the Grip-ball as a screening and monitoring device in practice, it is important to gain insight into intersession reliability during home-based use of the Grip-ball and clinical relevance of changes in grip strength.

Kleinschalig wonen voor ouderen met dementie: de invloed op bewoners, mantelzorgers en medewerkers

Institutional dementia care is increasingly directed towards small-scale and homelike care environments, in The Netherlands as well as abroad. In these facilities, a small number of residents, usually six to eight, live together, and normal daily household activities and social participation are emphasized. In a quasi-experimental study, we studied the effects of small-scale, homelike care environments on residents (n = 259), family caregivers (n = 206) and nursing staff (n = 305). We compared two types of institutional nursing care during a 1 year period (baseline assessment and follow-up measurements at 6 and 12 months): (28) small-scale, homelike care environments and (21) psychogeriatric wards in traditional nursing homes. A matching procedure was applied to increase comparability of residents at baseline regarding functional status and cognition. This study was unable to demonstrate convincing overall effects of small-scale, homelike care facilities. On our primary outcome measures, such as quality of life and behaviour of residents and job satisfaction and motivation of nursing staff, no differences were found with traditional nursing homes. We conclude that small-scale, homelike care environments are not necessarily a better care environment than regular nursing homes and other types of living arrangements should be considered carefully. This provides opportunities for residents and their family caregivers to make a choice which care facility suits their wishes and beliefs best.