Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, long-term care (LTC) facilities faced challenges in establishing appropriate goals of care (GoC) for residents during health crises. To address this, a virtual specialist consultation program was implemented to align care interventions with residents' frailty and expected outcomes.
Methods: We explored barriers and enablers to the implementation and sustainability of the program using structured interviews (n=20) with LTC leadership, health-care staff, and members of the program. Data were coded according to the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) using thematic analysis.
Results: Participants described how the program improved care and reduced unnecessary transfers. Implementation was enabled by a high degree of tension for change, relative priority, relative advantage, and the team's shared mental model of frailty-care. Inconsistencies in GoC approaches and information silos between LTC and acute-care challenged implementation. Sustainability was hindered by decreased pandemic urgency, resulting in reallocation of resources to usual care. The need for a specialized GoC service in LTC became less obvious outside of a crisis.
Conclusions: This implementation study provides important insights for future spread and scale of embedding virtual specialist consultation services into LTC. The findings underscore the importance of collegial relationships and shared care philosophies to effectively implement frailty-informed care initiatives during crises. However, sustaining cross-sectoral GoC services may be challenging amidst evolving workloads and prevailing cultural perceptions of end-of-life care needs.
{"title":"Virtual Goals of Care Consultation for Advanced Frailty: a Qualitative Implementation Study Providing Insights from the Pandemic.","authors":"Nabha Shetty, Tanya MacLeod, Ashley Paige Miller, Melissa Buckler, Laurie Mallery, Anne-Marie Krueger-Naug, Maia von Maltzahn, Paige Moorhouse","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.759","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.759","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>During the COVID-19 pandemic, long-term care (LTC) facilities faced challenges in establishing appropriate goals of care (GoC) for residents during health crises. To address this, a virtual specialist consultation program was implemented to align care interventions with residents' frailty and expected outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We explored barriers and enablers to the implementation and sustainability of the program using structured interviews (n=20) with LTC leadership, health-care staff, and members of the program. Data were coded according to the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) using thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants described how the program improved care and reduced unnecessary transfers. Implementation was enabled by a high degree of tension for change, relative priority, relative advantage, and the team's shared mental model of frailty-care. Inconsistencies in GoC approaches and information silos between LTC and acute-care challenged implementation. Sustainability was hindered by decreased pandemic urgency, resulting in reallocation of resources to usual care. The need for a specialized GoC service in LTC became less obvious outside of a crisis.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This implementation study provides important insights for future spread and scale of embedding virtual specialist consultation services into LTC. The findings underscore the importance of collegial relationships and shared care philosophies to effectively implement frailty-informed care initiatives during crises. However, sustaining cross-sectoral GoC services may be challenging amidst evolving workloads and prevailing cultural perceptions of end-of-life care needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882204/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Deniz Cetin-Sahin, Claire Godard-Sebillotte, Susan E Bronskill, Dallas Seitz, Debra G Morgan, Laura C Maclagan, Nadia Sourial, Jacqueline Quail, Andrea Gruneir, Machelle Wilchesky, Louis Rochette, Victoria Kubuta Massamba, Erik Youngson, Christina Diong, Eric E Smith, Geneviève Arsenault-Lapierre, Mélanie Le Berre, Colleen J Maxwell, Julie Kosteniuk, Delphine Bosson-Rieutort, Ting Wang, Kori Miskucza, Isabelle Vedel
Background: Previous studies on the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on persons living with dementia (PLWD) were mostly conducted in a single jurisdiction or focused on a limited number of outcomes. Our study estimates the impact of the first two pandemic waves on emergency department (ED) visits (all-cause/ambulatory care sensitive conditions), hospitalizations (all-cause/30-day readmissions), and all-cause mortality in four Canadian jurisdictions.
Methods: Using administrative databases from Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Quebec, we assembled two closed retrospective cohorts (2019/pre-pandemic control and 2020/pandemic) of PLWD aged 65+. Within community and nursing home settings, the rates of the above-mentioned outcomes in three pandemic periods (first wave, interim period, second wave) were compared to the corresponding pre-pandemic periods. We performed random effects meta-analyses on the provincial incident rate ratios.
Results: Pre-pandemic and pandemic cohorts included 167,095 vs. 173,240 (community) and 93,374 vs. 92,434 (nursing home) individuals, respectively. During the first wave, community and nursing home populations experienced significant declines in the rates of all-cause ED visits (36% vs. 40%) and hospitalizations (25% vs. 22%), which persisted in the following periods in the community. These declines were greater for the rates of ambulatory care sensitive condition ED visits and 30-day readmissions. Mortality was 36% higher in nursing homes (first wave) and 13% higher in the community (second wave).
Conclusions: It is key to prepare for future health crises and ensure that PLWD receive necessary care and services and do not have such a high mortality rate. Attention should be equally given to PLWD living in their homes and nursing homes.
{"title":"The COVID-19 Pandemic and Dementia: a Multijurisdictional Meta-Analysis of the Impact of the First Two Pandemic Waves on Acute Health-care Utilization and Mortality in Canada.","authors":"Deniz Cetin-Sahin, Claire Godard-Sebillotte, Susan E Bronskill, Dallas Seitz, Debra G Morgan, Laura C Maclagan, Nadia Sourial, Jacqueline Quail, Andrea Gruneir, Machelle Wilchesky, Louis Rochette, Victoria Kubuta Massamba, Erik Youngson, Christina Diong, Eric E Smith, Geneviève Arsenault-Lapierre, Mélanie Le Berre, Colleen J Maxwell, Julie Kosteniuk, Delphine Bosson-Rieutort, Ting Wang, Kori Miskucza, Isabelle Vedel","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.776","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.776","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous studies on the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on persons living with dementia (PLWD) were mostly conducted in a single jurisdiction or focused on a limited number of outcomes. Our study estimates the impact of the first two pandemic waves on emergency department (ED) visits (all-cause/ambulatory care sensitive conditions), hospitalizations (all-cause/30-day readmissions), and all-cause mortality in four Canadian jurisdictions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using administrative databases from Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Quebec, we assembled two closed retrospective cohorts (2019/pre-pandemic control and 2020/pandemic) of PLWD aged 65+. Within community and nursing home settings, the rates of the above-mentioned outcomes in three pandemic periods (first wave, interim period, second wave) were compared to the corresponding pre-pandemic periods. We performed random effects meta-analyses on the provincial incident rate ratios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-pandemic and pandemic cohorts included 167,095 vs. 173,240 (community) and 93,374 vs. 92,434 (nursing home) individuals, respectively. During the first wave, community and nursing home populations experienced significant declines in the rates of all-cause ED visits (36% vs. 40%) and hospitalizations (25% vs. 22%), which persisted in the following periods in the community. These declines were greater for the rates of ambulatory care sensitive condition ED visits and 30-day readmissions. Mortality was 36% higher in nursing homes (first wave) and 13% higher in the community (second wave).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>It is key to prepare for future health crises and ensure that PLWD receive necessary care and services and do not have such a high mortality rate. Attention should be equally given to PLWD living in their homes and nursing homes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"16-30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882212/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Background: Nursing homes and supportive living facilities (continuing care homes [CCH]) are often regarded as separate from their communities. Although occasional studies highlight volunteering or intergenerational activities, there is little systematic evaluation of the existence of activities in CCH that may promote community integration.
Methods: Study Design: The study utilized a sequential quantitative-qualitative approach: cross-sectional survey followed by semi-structured interviews. Setting: All registered long-term care (nursing home) and supportive living facilities (Levels 3, 4, and 4 Dementia) within Alberta. Subjects: The survey and interviews were conducted with directors of care. The survey was distributed to 334 facilities. Data saturation in the interviews was reached with seven participants.
Results: 140 responses were received; 116 were analyzable (34.7% response rate). The range of activities varied widely. Prior to Covid-19, the most common were spiritual activities entering CCH (96.5%) and volunteers entering CCH (93.0%); CCH rarely had activities such as child daycare (5.2%). 12.9% of spiritual activities entering CCH had not been restarted following the pandemic, but homes were planning to restart this activity (16) or start it as a new activity (1). There was no statistically significant relationship between any activity and facility owner-operator model, size, type, or geography (urban/rural) at any survey time category. Four themes emerged from the interviews: resident quality of life and well-being, home's capacity and openness, sources of support, and planning and programming for implementation.
Conclusions: This study addresses a knowledge gap regarding community integration in CCH and provides insight on the types of community-integrated activities occurring in Alberta's CCH.
{"title":"To What Extent are Alberta Nursing Homes and Supportive Living Facilities Integrated with Their Community? A Sequential Quantitative-Qualitative Study.","authors":"Michelle C Gao, Saima Rajabali, Adrian Wagg","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.783","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.783","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nursing homes and supportive living facilities (continuing care homes [CCH]) are often regarded as separate from their communities. Although occasional studies highlight volunteering or intergenerational activities, there is little systematic evaluation of the existence of activities in CCH that may promote community integration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Study Design: The study utilized a sequential quantitative-qualitative approach: cross-sectional survey followed by semi-structured interviews. Setting: All registered long-term care (nursing home) and supportive living facilities (Levels 3, 4, and 4 Dementia) within Alberta. Subjects: The survey and interviews were conducted with directors of care. The survey was distributed to 334 facilities. Data saturation in the interviews was reached with seven participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>140 responses were received; 116 were analyzable (34.7% response rate). The range of activities varied widely. Prior to Covid-19, the most common were spiritual activities entering CCH (96.5%) and volunteers entering CCH (93.0%); CCH rarely had activities such as child daycare (5.2%). 12.9% of spiritual activities entering CCH had not been restarted following the pandemic, but homes were planning to restart this activity (16) or start it as a new activity (1). There was no statistically significant relationship between any activity and facility owner-operator model, size, type, or geography (urban/rural) at any survey time category. Four themes emerged from the interviews: resident quality of life and well-being, home's capacity and openness, sources of support, and planning and programming for implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study addresses a knowledge gap regarding community integration in CCH and provides insight on the types of community-integrated activities occurring in Alberta's CCH.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"53-66"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882210/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Thank You to Our Reviewers in 2024.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"105"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882205/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574658","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nicholas C Chan, Joe Pedulla, Alicia Remark, Sue Bartleman, Ana Macpherson, Howard Abrams, Melissa Chang
{"title":"Breaking the Inverse Care Law for Fall Prevention Programs: a Collaborative and Community-led Approach.","authors":"Nicholas C Chan, Joe Pedulla, Alicia Remark, Sue Bartleman, Ana Macpherson, Howard Abrams, Melissa Chang","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.799","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.799","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"103-104"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882208/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rhiannon L Roberts, Haris Imsirovic, Robert Talarico, Wenshan Li, André Carrington, Kruti Patel, Douglas Manuel, Peter Tanuseputro, Steven Hawken, Colleen Webber
Background: As individuals approach death, they experience declines in their cognitive, physical, motor, sensory, physiologic, and psychosocial functions. In this exploratory study we examined individuals' physiologic changes in the last year of life by examining laboratory tests commonly used in clinical practice.
Methods: Using health administrative datasets, we conducted an observational matched cohort study to assess laboratory test use and values over a decedent's last 12 months and a matched observation window for non-decedents. Laboratory tests included tests for electrolytes: potassium and sodium; complete blood count: hemoglobin and leukocytes; diabetes: hemoglobin A1c; and kidney or liver function: albumin-serum, alanine aminotransferase, and creatinine.
Results: We identified 376,463 decedents, 367,474 (97.6%) of whom were matched to non-decedents (similar age and sex). For each test, the proportion of non-decedents who received the test was stable over the 12-month observation period. A higher proportion of decedents had a laboratory test than non-decedents for all but the diabetes test. As decedents neared death, there was a gradual increase in test use until their final month of life, when test use dramatically increased. Across all laboratory tests, test values remained similar for non-decedents over the 12-month observation period. However, for decedents, there were differences in the magnitude and direction of the test values over the 12 months.
Conclusion: Our findings indicate distinct changes in decedents' laboratory test use and values over their last 12 months. Future work should explore whether laboratory tests could predict survival or improve the performance of mortality prediction models.
{"title":"Laboratory Test Use and Values in the Last Year of Life-a Matched Cohort Design.","authors":"Rhiannon L Roberts, Haris Imsirovic, Robert Talarico, Wenshan Li, André Carrington, Kruti Patel, Douglas Manuel, Peter Tanuseputro, Steven Hawken, Colleen Webber","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.808","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.808","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As individuals approach death, they experience declines in their cognitive, physical, motor, sensory, physiologic, and psychosocial functions. In this exploratory study we examined individuals' physiologic changes in the last year of life by examining laboratory tests commonly used in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using health administrative datasets, we conducted an observational matched cohort study to assess laboratory test use and values over a decedent's last 12 months and a matched observation window for non-decedents. Laboratory tests included tests for electrolytes: potassium and sodium; complete blood count: hemoglobin and leukocytes; diabetes: hemoglobin A1c; and kidney or liver function: albumin-serum, alanine aminotransferase, and creatinine.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 376,463 decedents, 367,474 (97.6%) of whom were matched to non-decedents (similar age and sex). For each test, the proportion of non-decedents who received the test was stable over the 12-month observation period. A higher proportion of decedents had a laboratory test than non-decedents for all but the diabetes test. As decedents neared death, there was a gradual increase in test use until their final month of life, when test use dramatically increased. Across all laboratory tests, test values remained similar for non-decedents over the 12-month observation period. However, for decedents, there were differences in the magnitude and direction of the test values over the 12 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate distinct changes in decedents' laboratory test use and values over their last 12 months. Future work should explore whether laboratory tests could predict survival or improve the performance of mortality prediction models.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"73-86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882211/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stacey Hatch, Dallas P Seitz, Marie-Andrée Bruneau, Vivian Ewa, Sid Feldman, Yael Goldberg, Zahra Goodarzi, Nathan Herrmann, Debbie Hewitt Colborne, Alexandre Henri-Bhargava, Zahinoor Ismail, Julia Kirkham, Sanjeev Kumar, Krista L Lanctôt, Wade Thompson, Jennifer Porter, Jennifer A Watt
In Canada, approximately 730,000 people are currently living with dementia. Over 75% will experience behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). There is a lack of consensus on best practices for the assessment and management of BPSD. In 2024, the Canadian Coalition for Seniors Mental Health (CCSMH) developed a Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for assessing and managing BPSD, specifically for agitation, depression, anxiety, psychosis, and sexual expressions of potential risk, and deprescribing antipsychotics and psychotropic medications. Development of the BPSD CPG followed the Guideline International Network (GIN)-McMaster Guideline Development checklist. The guideline is intended for people living with dementia, caregivers of people living with dementia, and health-care providers in community, outpatient, inpatient, long-term care, and other residential care settings. Recommendations were informed by a Canada-wide prioritization exercise to identify CPG topics and preferred terms for describing BPSD. A systematic review of existing dementia CPGs, an overview of systematic reviews on assessing and managing BPSD, and systematic reviews of tools for measuring psychosis, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in people living with dementia was undertaken, along with a rapid review of studies of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions for reducing sexual expressions of potential risk in people living with dementia. Guideline panel members voted on recommendation strength and quality of evidence, per the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. This CPG resulted in 11 good practice statements and 63 guideline recommendations that will inform BPSD best practices in a Canadian health-care context.
{"title":"The Canadian Coalition for Seniors' Mental Health Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines for Assessing and Managing Behavioural and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia (BPSD).","authors":"Stacey Hatch, Dallas P Seitz, Marie-Andrée Bruneau, Vivian Ewa, Sid Feldman, Yael Goldberg, Zahra Goodarzi, Nathan Herrmann, Debbie Hewitt Colborne, Alexandre Henri-Bhargava, Zahinoor Ismail, Julia Kirkham, Sanjeev Kumar, Krista L Lanctôt, Wade Thompson, Jennifer Porter, Jennifer A Watt","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.820","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.820","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In Canada, approximately 730,000 people are currently living with dementia. Over 75% will experience behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). There is a lack of consensus on best practices for the assessment and management of BPSD. In 2024, the Canadian Coalition for Seniors Mental Health (CCSMH) developed a Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for assessing and managing BPSD, specifically for agitation, depression, anxiety, psychosis, and sexual expressions of potential risk, and deprescribing antipsychotics and psychotropic medications. Development of the BPSD CPG followed the Guideline International Network (GIN)-McMaster Guideline Development checklist. The guideline is intended for people living with dementia, caregivers of people living with dementia, and health-care providers in community, outpatient, inpatient, long-term care, and other residential care settings. Recommendations were informed by a Canada-wide prioritization exercise to identify CPG topics and preferred terms for describing BPSD. A systematic review of existing dementia CPGs, an overview of systematic reviews on assessing and managing BPSD, and systematic reviews of tools for measuring psychosis, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in people living with dementia was undertaken, along with a rapid review of studies of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions for reducing sexual expressions of potential risk in people living with dementia. Guideline panel members voted on recommendation strength and quality of evidence, per the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. This CPG resulted in 11 good practice statements and 63 guideline recommendations that will inform BPSD best practices in a Canadian health-care context.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"91-102"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882202/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Aidan Steeves, Karla Faig, Chris McGibbon, Andrew Sexton, Pamela Jarrett
Little is known about whether cognitive assessments can be completed remotely by older adults at risk for dementia, and there is no consensus on which tool is best. The SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home) study evaluated the feasibility of a home-based, double-blind, randomized-controlled trial to improve gait and cognition in individuals at risk for dementia. This paper reports a secondary analytic outcome of the cognitive tests used. The three aims were: 1) to examine whether the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA 8.1 Audiovisual), Cognitive-Functional Composite2 (CFC2), and Telephone Cognitive Screen (T-CogS) could be administered remotely; 2) to compare each tool; 3) to evaluate changes in cognition following the intervention. Sixty participants were randomized to one of four physical/cognitive exercise intervention arms, with 52 participants completing the intervention. Cognitive tests were done in the homes of participants via Zoom for Healthcare™. All 52 participants completed the assessments. The interquartile range (IQR) for the MoCA was 4, the CFC2 was 8, and the T-CogS was 1. At baseline, 11.5% scored perfectly on the MoCA, 0% scored perfectly on the CFC2, and 62% scored perfectly on the T-CogS. Scores on the MoCA (p=.076), CFC2 (p=.053), and T-CogS (p=.281) were not statistically significantly different from baseline to post-intervention. This study demonstrates that these cognitive tests can be administered remotely, with the MoCA and the CFC2 being the most sensitive to variability in scores.
对于认知评估是否可以由有痴呆风险的老年人远程完成,我们知之甚少,而且对于哪种工具是最好的也没有达成共识。同步运动、步态和认知补救在家(SYNERGIC@Home)研究评估了一项基于家庭的、双盲的、随机对照试验的可行性,以改善痴呆风险个体的步态和认知。本文报告了所使用的认知测试的二次分析结果。三个目的是:1)检验蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA 8.1 Audiovisual)、认知功能复合测试(CFC2)和电话认知屏幕(T-CogS)是否可以远程管理;2)对各工具进行比较;3)评估干预后认知的变化。60名参与者被随机分为四个身体/认知运动干预组,其中52名参与者完成了干预。认知测试通过Zoom for Healthcare™在参与者家中完成。所有52名参与者都完成了评估。MoCA的四分位间距(IQR)为4,CFC2为8,T-CogS为1。在基线时,11.5%的人在MoCA上得分完美,0%的人在CFC2上得分完美,62%的人在T-CogS上得分完美。MoCA评分(p= 0.076)、CFC2评分(p= 0.053)、T-CogS评分(p= 0.281)与干预后比较差异无统计学意义。这项研究表明,这些认知测试可以远程进行,MoCA和CFC2对分数的变化最敏感。
{"title":"Assessing Cognition Remotely: Expanding the Reach of Cognitive Testing for Older Adults at Risk for Dementia in a Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Aidan Steeves, Karla Faig, Chris McGibbon, Andrew Sexton, Pamela Jarrett","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.790","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.790","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about whether cognitive assessments can be completed remotely by older adults at risk for dementia, and there is no consensus on which tool is best. The SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home) study evaluated the feasibility of a home-based, double-blind, randomized-controlled trial to improve gait and cognition in individuals at risk for dementia. This paper reports a secondary analytic outcome of the cognitive tests used. The three aims were: 1) to examine whether the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA 8.1 Audiovisual), Cognitive-Functional Composite2 (CFC2), and Telephone Cognitive Screen (T-CogS) could be administered remotely; 2) to compare each tool; 3) to evaluate changes in cognition following the intervention. Sixty participants were randomized to one of four physical/cognitive exercise intervention arms, with 52 participants completing the intervention. Cognitive tests were done in the homes of participants via Zoom for Healthcare™. All 52 participants completed the assessments. The interquartile range (IQR) for the MoCA was 4, the CFC2 was 8, and the T-CogS was 1. At baseline, 11.5% scored perfectly on the MoCA, 0% scored perfectly on the CFC2, and 62% scored perfectly on the T-CogS. Scores on the MoCA (<i>p</i>=.076), CFC2 (<i>p</i>=.053), and T-CogS (<i>p</i>=.281) were not statistically significantly different from baseline to post-intervention. This study demonstrates that these cognitive tests can be administered remotely, with the MoCA and the CFC2 being the most sensitive to variability in scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"87-90"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882207/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574625","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Krista M Reich, Jennifer Watt, Bing Li, Jason Jiang, Zahra Goodarzi
Background: Geriatric consultation for Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) improves outcomes of older adults living with frailty who are hospitalized, but consultation patterns and utilization of inpatient geriatric consultation teams by other hospital-based services are poorly understood.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using linked health administrative data to describe characteristics of older adults (≥ 65 years) who received a CGA while hospitalized between January 1, and December 31, 2019. We identified hospital-based services requesting CGA and the frequency and reasons for referral. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association between patient-level characteristics and receiving a CGA.
Results: A total of 29,090 older adults were admitted to hospital; 38.7% were classified as frail and 5.4% (1,563 patients) received at least one CGA. The top three reasons for requesting a CGA were to assess the need for care on an inpatient geriatric rehabilitation unit (43%), and for assessment and management of delirium (27%) and dementia (24%). Referrals were most frequently received from Hospitalists (48%). Frailty was associated with increased odds of receiving a CGA (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 12.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.67-14.82). A diagnosis of cancer was associated with lower odds of receiving a CGA (aOR 0.75; 95% CI 0.60-0.93).
Conclusions: Inpatient geriatric consultation teams support 5.4% of hospitalized older adults. With the rapidly growing aging population, future efforts are needed to explore the optimal delivery of inpatient geriatric services to support its sustainable provision.
背景:老年综合评估的老年咨询(CGA)改善了住院的虚弱老年人的预后,但其他医院基础服务的咨询模式和住院老年咨询团队的利用尚不清楚。方法:我们使用相关的健康管理数据进行了一项横断面研究,以描述2019年1月1日至12月31日住院期间接受CGA的老年人(≥65岁)的特征。我们确定了需要CGA的医院服务以及转诊的频率和原因。我们使用多变量逻辑回归来估计患者水平特征与接受CGA之间的关系。结果:共有29,090名老年人住院;38.7%被归类为虚弱,5.4%(1,563例)接受了至少一次CGA。要求CGA的前三个原因是评估住院老年康复病房的护理需求(43%),评估和管理谵妄(27%)和痴呆(24%)。转诊最多的是医院医生(48%)。虚弱与接受CGA的几率增加相关(调整优势比[aOR] 12.02;95%置信区间[CI] 9.67-14.82)。癌症诊断与较低的接受CGA的几率相关(aOR 0.75;95% ci 0.60-0.93)。结论:住院老年会诊团队支持5.4%的住院老年人。随着老龄化人口的迅速增长,未来需要努力探索老年住院服务的最佳提供方式,以支持其可持续提供。
{"title":"Understanding Local Consultation Patterns of Inpatient Geriatric Medicine Teams: a Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Krista M Reich, Jennifer Watt, Bing Li, Jason Jiang, Zahra Goodarzi","doi":"10.5770/cgj.28.768","DOIUrl":"10.5770/cgj.28.768","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Geriatric consultation for Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) improves outcomes of older adults living with frailty who are hospitalized, but consultation patterns and utilization of inpatient geriatric consultation teams by other hospital-based services are poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study using linked health administrative data to describe characteristics of older adults (≥ 65 years) who received a CGA while hospitalized between January 1, and December 31, 2019. We identified hospital-based services requesting CGA and the frequency and reasons for referral. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association between patient-level characteristics and receiving a CGA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 29,090 older adults were admitted to hospital; 38.7% were classified as frail and 5.4% (1,563 patients) received at least one CGA. The top three reasons for requesting a CGA were to assess the need for care on an inpatient geriatric rehabilitation unit (43%), and for assessment and management of delirium (27%) and dementia (24%). Referrals were most frequently received from Hospitalists (48%). Frailty was associated with increased odds of receiving a CGA (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 12.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.67-14.82). A diagnosis of cancer was associated with lower odds of receiving a CGA (aOR 0.75; 95% CI 0.60-0.93).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Inpatient geriatric consultation teams support 5.4% of hospitalized older adults. With the rapidly growing aging population, future efforts are needed to explore the optimal delivery of inpatient geriatric services to support its sustainable provision.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"41-52"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882203/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143574741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction: Urinary incontinence (UI), the complaint of involuntary leakage of urine, has a substantial impact on the quality of life of older adults. Most UI research is driven by researchers and lacks the patient perspective. The goal of this qualitative study was to gain the perspective of older adults in formulating a research agenda tailored to address their questions and improve their experience with managing UI.
Methods: Implementing a community-based participatory research framework, an advisory group of eight older adults with UI were recruited to be on the research team. An initial focus group was conducted to learn about their research needs. Nominal Group Technique was used to reach saturation of themes and data was analyzed thematically. Employing a Delphi consensus method, a national online questionnaire containing 20 priorities for future UI research and education was developed in collaboration with the advisory group.
Results: 59 older adults with UI rated each priority on a Likert scale. Priorities which advanced to the second round were re-rated, with an 85% response rate. 11 priorities of ≥80% agreement were retained. The highest rated priorities included relationship between physical activity and UI; support for those with UI; causes of UI and its management; sleep and UI; and public restroom accessibility.
Conclusions: Findings from this study will help researchers and health-care professionals understand and address the needs of older adults with UI. Efforts should be made to translate research findings in this area and disseminate them in a medium accessible to older adults.
{"title":"Exploring the Priorities of Older Adults in Managing Urinary Incontinence: a Patient-Oriented Research Approach.","authors":"Marina Kirillovich, Saima Rajabali, Adrian Wagg","doi":"10.5770/cgj.27.758","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5770/cgj.27.758","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Urinary incontinence (UI), the complaint of involuntary leakage of urine, has a substantial impact on the quality of life of older adults. Most UI research is driven by researchers and lacks the patient perspective. The goal of this qualitative study was to gain the perspective of older adults in formulating a research agenda tailored to address their questions and improve their experience with managing UI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Implementing a community-based participatory research framework, an advisory group of eight older adults with UI were recruited to be on the research team. An initial focus group was conducted to learn about their research needs. Nominal Group Technique was used to reach saturation of themes and data was analyzed thematically. Employing a Delphi consensus method, a national online questionnaire containing 20 priorities for future UI research and education was developed in collaboration with the advisory group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>59 older adults with UI rated each priority on a Likert scale. Priorities which advanced to the second round were re-rated, with an 85% response rate. 11 priorities of ≥80% agreement were retained. The highest rated priorities included relationship between physical activity and UI; support for those with UI; causes of UI and its management; sleep and UI; and public restroom accessibility.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings from this study will help researchers and health-care professionals understand and address the needs of older adults with UI. Efforts should be made to translate research findings in this area and disseminate them in a medium accessible to older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":56182,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Geriatrics Journal","volume":"27 4","pages":"473-484"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11583892/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142775149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}