Assessment tools addressing avoidable care transitions in older adults: a systematic literature review.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY European Geriatric Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-29 DOI:10.1007/s41999-024-01106-7
Rustem Makhmutov, Alicia Calle Egusquiza, Cristina Roqueta Guillen, Eva-Maria Amor Fernandez, Gabriele Meyer, Moriah E Ellen, Steffen Fleischer, Anna Renom Guiteras
{"title":"Assessment tools addressing avoidable care transitions in older adults: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Rustem Makhmutov, Alicia Calle Egusquiza, Cristina Roqueta Guillen, Eva-Maria Amor Fernandez, Gabriele Meyer, Moriah E Ellen, Steffen Fleischer, Anna Renom Guiteras","doi":"10.1007/s41999-024-01106-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The phenomenon of avoidable care transitions has received increasing attention over the last decades due to its frequency and associated burden for the patients and the healthcare system. A number of assessment tools to identify avoidable transitions have been designed and implemented. The selection of the most appropriate tool appears to be challenging and time-consuming. This systematic review aimed to identify and comprehensively describe the assessment tools that can support stakeholders´ care transition decisions on older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was conducted as part of the TRANS-SENIOR research network. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL. No restrictions regarding publication date and language were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search in three electronic databases revealed 1266 references and screening for eligibility resulted in 58 articles for inclusion. A total of 48 assessment tools were identified covering different concepts, judgement processes, and transition destinations. We found variation in the comprehensiveness of the tools with regard to dimensions used in the judgement process.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All tools are not comprehensive with respect to the dimensions covered, as they address only one or a few perspectives. Although assessment tools can be useful in clinical practice, it is worth it to bear in mind that they are meant to support decision-making and supplement the care professional´s judgement, instead of replacing it. Our review might guide clinicians and researchers in choosing the right tool for identification of avoidable care transitions, and thus support informed decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":49287,"journal":{"name":"European Geriatric Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Geriatric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-024-01106-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The phenomenon of avoidable care transitions has received increasing attention over the last decades due to its frequency and associated burden for the patients and the healthcare system. A number of assessment tools to identify avoidable transitions have been designed and implemented. The selection of the most appropriate tool appears to be challenging and time-consuming. This systematic review aimed to identify and comprehensively describe the assessment tools that can support stakeholders´ care transition decisions on older adults.

Methods: This study was conducted as part of the TRANS-SENIOR research network. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL. No restrictions regarding publication date and language were applied.

Results: The search in three electronic databases revealed 1266 references and screening for eligibility resulted in 58 articles for inclusion. A total of 48 assessment tools were identified covering different concepts, judgement processes, and transition destinations. We found variation in the comprehensiveness of the tools with regard to dimensions used in the judgement process.

Conclusion: All tools are not comprehensive with respect to the dimensions covered, as they address only one or a few perspectives. Although assessment tools can be useful in clinical practice, it is worth it to bear in mind that they are meant to support decision-making and supplement the care professional´s judgement, instead of replacing it. Our review might guide clinicians and researchers in choosing the right tool for identification of avoidable care transitions, and thus support informed decision-making.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Geriatric Medicine
European Geriatric Medicine GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Geriatric Medicine is the official journal of the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS). Launched in 2010, this journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of Geriatric Medicine. The EUGMS is interested in the promotion of Geriatric Medicine in any setting (acute or subacute care, rehabilitation, nursing homes, primary care, fall clinics, ambulatory assessment, dementia clinics..), and also in functionality in old age, comprehensive geriatric assessment, geriatric syndromes, geriatric education, old age psychiatry, models of geriatric care in health services, and quality assurance.
期刊最新文献
A systematic review on dysphagia treatments for persons living with dementia. Assessment tools addressing avoidable care transitions in older adults: a systematic literature review. Cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between glycaemic measures and grip strength in people without diabetes in the UK Biobank cohort study. New onset seizures in Octogenarians. Feasibility, acceptability and prognostic value of muscle mass and strength measurement in patients with hip fracture: a systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1