Journal of the American Geriatrics Society最新文献

In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released STEADI (Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths and Injuries) toolkit which is based on the 2011 American Geriatrics Society/British Geriatrics Society (AGS/BGS) fall prevention guideline. In 2024, the National Network of Public Health Institutes (NNPHI), via a Cooperative Award with the CDC of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), invited AGS to recommend updates to STEADI with a focus on falls prevention in primary care. An AGS workgroup reviewed the 2022/2024 publications and held three outreach events with stakeholders (448 participants) to get feedback on current STEADI materials and draft recommendations focused on primary care. Recommendations for improving uptake of STEADI included reframing the why (alignment with ambulation goals) and the how (engage all available interdisciplinary team members) and addressing time limitations by prioritizing STEADI elements that can be done with available time and completing assessments across multiple visits. Screening recommendations included using the Three Key Questions first, and only if positive, asking the remaining Stay Independent questions. Assessment recommendations were to limit the scope of some activities (e.g., consider specifically fall risk-increasing drugs) while expanding others (e.g., incorporating hearing and bladder health assessments). Where the choice of intervention is obvious from screening (e.g., referral to a physical therapist if screening questions points to a strength, mobility, or gait problem), an in-office assessment may reasonably be skipped. These recommendations could improve effectiveness and ease of implementation of STEADI in primary care and help primary care teams reframe fall prevention as a chronic condition deserving ongoing engagement, assessment, intervention, and follow-up.

Improving the quality of medication use and medication safety are important priorities for healthcare providers who care for older adults. The objective of this article was to identify four exemplary articles with this focus in 2023. We selected high-quality studies that advanced this field of research. The chosen articles cover domains related to deprescribing/discontinuation, optimizing medication use, medication safety/adverse drug events, and other. The first study was a randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of the patient-centered Shed-MEDS deprescribing intervention among older adults transitioning from the hospital to postacute care facilities (domain: deprescribing/discontinuation). The second study, a retrospective cohort study among Medicare beneficiaries, described the phenomenon of a prescribing cascade relic and evaluated continued potassium use after discontinuation of a loop diuretic (domain: optimizing medication use). The third study was a systematic review and meta-analysis describing the prevalence of drug-drug interactions among community-dwelling older adults (domain: other). Lastly, the fourth study was a retrospective cohort study among Medicare beneficiaries that evaluated concurrent gabapentin and opioid use and risk of mortality (domain: medication safety). Collectively, this review succinctly highlights pertinent topics related to promoting safe use of medications and promotes awareness of optimizing older adults' medication regimens.

Heart failure is a major contributor to morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs, especially among older adults. Despite a large body of evidence supporting the benefits of cardiac rehabilitation, less than 30% of eligible Medicare beneficiaries participate in cardiac rehabilitation. Thus, it is essential to examine alternatives, such as physical rehabilitation, a rehabilitation approach that focuses on physical activity and function. We systematically identified and summarized four key articles published between 2022 and 2024 that highlight innovations in rehabilitation with the potential of increasing utilization. These articles emphasize three areas of opportunity: (1) home-based telerehabilitation; (2) research focused on underrepresented and underserved populations; and (3) economic evaluations. Additional research on alternative modes of cardiac or physical rehabilitation, strategies to address heart failure-related health inequities, and implementation studies incorporating cost-effectiveness are needed to support increased utilization of cardiac and physical rehabilitation.

Background: Older persons living with dementia (PLWD) often have multiple other chronic health conditions (i.e., comorbidities). Network analyses can describe complex profiles of chronic health conditions through graphical displays grounded in empirical data. Our study compared patterns of chronic health conditions among PLWD residing in and outside of long-term care (LTC) settings.

Methods: Population-based administrative data, including outpatient physician claims, inpatient records, pharmaceutical records, and LTC records, for the study were from the Canadian province of Manitoba. We included PLWD, ages ≥ 67 years, with two or more other chronic health conditions, who resided in Manitoba from 2017 to 2020. A total of 138 chronic health conditions were ascertained using a modification of the open-source Clinical Classification Software. Networks defined by nodes (health conditions) and edges (associations between nodes) were stratified by residence location (in versus outside LTC). Network properties were described, including: density (ratio of number of edges to number of potential edges), and modularity (associations between and within clusters of health conditions), and the median and interquartile range (IQR) for node degree (number of associations per node).

Results: The population comprised 19,672 PLWD, of which 17,534 (89.1%) had two or more chronic health conditions. The median number of co-occurring conditions was similar among PLWD in LTC (median: 6, IQR: 3-10) versus outside LTC (median: 7, IQR: 4-10). Network properties were similar for PLWD and multiple comorbidities residing in versus outside LTC, including node degree (median 11 vs. 12), density (0.15 vs. 0.14), and modularity (0.18 vs. 0.26).

Conclusions: Multiple chronic diseases characterize PLWD residing in and outside of LTC. Using network analyses, chronic diseases among PLWD do not form easily distinguishable groups or patterns. This suggests the need for comprehensive clinical assessments, individualized approaches for disease management, and highlights the importance of person-specific care.

Background: Existing risk scores assessing geriatric vulnerability in the emergency department (ED) have shown limited predictive power, especially in diverse populations. We investigated the relationship of a quick and easy-to-administer geriatric vulnerability scoring system with functional decline and mortality in older patients admitted to multiple hospitals through the ED in the United States (US) and Brazil (BR).

Method: Federated, international, multicenter observational study of hospitalized ED patients aged ≥ 65 from US and BR. The six criteria from the PRO-AGE score (Physical impairment, Recent hospitalization, Older age [≥ 90], Acute mental alteration, Getting thinner, and Exhaustion; 0-8; higher scores = greater vulnerability) were assessed on admission. We used proportional hazards models to investigate the relationships between PRO-AGE score groups and 90-day mortality and functional decline, defined as new dependence in activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental ADL (IADL), after adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, Charlson comorbidity score, and study site. Death was considered a competing event for the functional decline outcome.

Results: A total of 1390 patients were included (US = 560; Brazil = 830). The 90-day risk of death was higher for the upper compared with the lower (reference) PRO-AGE group in both cohorts (US: HR = 11.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.56-54.04; BR: HR = 12.29; 95% CI = 3.54-42.59), whereas the risk of new 90-day ADL disability was higher for upper (HR = 2.08; 95% CI = 1.21-3.56) and middle groups (HR = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.35-3.27) in the US but only the upper group in BR (HR = 1.70; 95% CI = 1.02-2.85).

Conclusion: A higher PRO-AGE score was associated with mortality and functional decline in older ED patients admitted to hospitals in the US and BR, demonstrating its generalizability as a geriatric vulnerability risk score.

Background: International recognition of the increasing importance of care for older people has seen growing interest in models of care for older people. Yet there is limited information about the scope and breadth of models of care for older people. This article clarifies what is known about models of care for older people by summarizing relevant publications, describing the models depicted in these publications, and synthesizing the outcomes and impact presented in the publications.

Method: A scoping review was conducted that involved searching multiple databases to identify relevant publications, published in English, which presented a model of care for older people-specifically, non-Indigenous people aged ≥ 65 years and/or Indigenous people aged ≥ 50 years; and included evidence, broadly defined, about the utility or otherwise of the model. Commentaries, narrative letters, editorials, and reviews were excluded.

Results: From 21,767 publications, 276 were deemed relevant. From these, four key findings are apparent. First, models of care for older people are understood in disparate ways and are typically devoid of clear stepwise guidance. Second, most of the publications reported on a multidisciplinary approach. Third, they generally failed to involve carers. Fourth, very few publications reported on studies conducted in a rural area, and none involved Indigenous people.

Conclusion: Given the heterogeneity and breadth of models of care for older people, further research is needed to establish: a definition of a model of care for older people; reporting standards; the factors that help or hinder their effectiveness; how to ensure carer involvement; and how to adapt models of care for older people for priority populations.