Is care based on comprehensive geriatric assessment with mobile teams better than usual care? A study protocol of a randomised controlled trial (The GerMoT study)

Discordance in Frailty Measures in Old Community Dwelling People with Multimorbidity - A Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose

Assessment of frailty is a key method to identify older people in need of holistic care. However, agreement between different frailty instrument varies. Thus, groups classified as frail by different instruments are not completely overlapping. This study evaluated differences in sociodemographic factors, cognition, functional status, and quality of life between older persons with multimorbidity who were discordantly classified by five different frailty instruments, with focus on the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and Fried's Frailty Phenotype (FP).

Participants and Methods

This was a cross-sectional study in a community-dwelling setting. Inclusion criteria were as follows: ≥75 years old, ≥3 visits to the emergency department the past 18 months, and ≥3 diagnoses according to ICD-10. 450 participants were included. Frailty was assessed by CFS, FP, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Grip Strength and Walking Speed.

Results

385 participants had data on all frailty instruments. Prevalence of frailty ranged from 34% (CFS) to 75% (SPPB). Nine percent of participants were non-frail by all instruments, 20% were frail by all instruments and 71% had discordant frailty classifications. Those who were frail according to CFS but not by the other instruments had lower cognition and functional status. Those who were frail according to FP but not CFS were, to a larger extent, women, lived alone, had higher cognitive ability and functional status.

Conclusion

The CFS might not identify physically frail women in older community-dwelling people with multimorbidity. They could thus be at risk of not be given the attention their frail condition need.

Translation and Validation of the Swedish Version of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator

The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is a questionnaire with 15 questions designed for screening for frailty in community-dwelling older people. TFI has a multidimensional approach to frailty, including physical, psychological, and social dimensions. The aim of this study was to translate TFI into Swedish and study its psychometric properties in community-dwelling older people with multimorbidity. A cross-sectional study of individuals 75 years and older, with ≥3 diagnoses of the ICD-10 and ≥3 visits to the Emergency Department in the past 18 months. International guidelines for back-translation were followed. Psychometric properties of the TFI were examined by determining the reliability (inter-item correlations, internal consistency, test-retest) and validity (concurrent, construct, structural). A total of 315 participants (57.8% women) were included, and the mean age was 83.3 years. The reliability coefficient KR-20 was 0.69 for the total sum. A total of 39 individuals were re-tested, and the weighted kappa was 0.7. TFI correlated moderately with other frailty measures. The individual items correlated with alternative measures mostly as expected. In the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), a three-factor model fitted the data better than a one-factor model. We found evidence for adequate reliability and validity of the Swedish TFI and potential for improvements.

The challenge of recruiting multimorbid older patients identified in a hospital database to a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Research involving multimorbid older patients is gaining momentum. However, little is known about how to plan a randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving this group of patients. An evidence-based approach to the challenges of a recruitment process could guide researchers and help prevent underpowered trials.

AIM

To define the number of multimorbid older patients that need to be identified and the number of eligible patients that need to be invited to achieve the desired recruitment number to a RCT.

METHOD

We used recruitment data from the GerMoT trial, a RCT comparing proactive outpatient care based on Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment with usual care. Multimorbid older patients with high healthcare utilisation were recruited to the trial.

RESULTS

Of the 1212 patients identified in a database as meeting the inclusion criteria 838 (70%) could be invited to participate in the trial. The rest could not be invited for a variety of reasons; 162 had moved out of area or into nursing homes and 86 had died before they could be contacted. 113 could not be reached. 450 (54%) of the invited patients agreed to participate.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, we have shown that it is possible to achieve a good consent rate despite older participants with multimorbidity. This can be used when planning an RCT for this patient group, who are often excluded from clinical trials. Our results are specific to a context that provides similar abilities to identify and recruit patients as can be seen in Sweden.

"To be seen" - older adults and their relatives' care experiences given by a geriatric mobile team (GerMoT)

Background

The proportion of older people in the population has increased globally and has thus become a challenge in health and social care. There is good evidence that care based on comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is superior to the usual care found in acute hospital settings; however, the evidence is scarcer in community-dwelling older people.

This study is a secondary outcome of a randomized controlled trial of community-dwelling older people in which the intervention group (IG) received CGA-based care by a geriatric mobile geriatric team (GerMoT). The aim of this study is to obtain a better understanding, from the patients’ perspective, the experience of being a part of the IG for both the participants and their relatives.

Methods

Qualitative semistructured interviews of twenty-two community dwelling participants and eleven of their relatives were conducted using content analysis for interpretation.

Results

The main finding expressed by the participants and their relatives was in the form of feelings related to safety and security and being recognized. The participants found the care easily accessible, and that contacts could be taken according to needs by health care professionals who knew them. This is in accordance with person-centred care as recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) for older people in need of integrated care. Other positive aspects were recurrent health examinations and being given the time needed when seeking health care. Not all participants were positive as some found the information about the intervention to be unclear especially regarding whom to contact when in different situations.

Conclusions

CGA-based care of community-dwelling older people shows promising results as the participants in GerMoT found the care was giving a feeling of security and safety. They found the care easily accessible and that it was provided by health care professionals who knew them as a person and knew their health care problems. They found this to be in contrast to the usual care provided, but GerMoT care did not fulfill some people’s expectations.

Use of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in Oncology Patients to Guide Treatment Decisions and Predict Chemotherapy Toxicity

Purpose

Our objective was to review the utility of pretreatment comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and its impact on decision making regarding choice and intensity of oncologic therapeutic regimens for older, frail, or poor-functional-status patients, as well as using this prospective assessment to predict chemotherapy-related toxicities. Database searches were conducted in Medline, PubMed, and Ovid for clinical studies, review articles, and journal publications. Search terms included geriatric assessment, medical oncology, chemotherapy, frailty, toxicity, and functional status. Thirty-seven pertinent articles were retrieved and serve as the basis for this clinical review.

Observations

CGA is an important tool for examining aspects of frailty and functional status that are not captured by traditional performance status measures. These findings may then be used in selection of appropriate therapeutic regimens for a given patient that are efficacious and tolerable. Such pretreatment assessments also have been used in predicting therapy-related toxicities.

Conclusions

Frail and older patients are common in oncology practices and are at high risk for therapy-related toxicities because of comorbidities and physiologic changes, presenting a considerable clinical challenge. CGA establishes evidence-based strategies to better assess the functional status of such patients and is predictive for chemotherapy-related toxicities in this vulnerable group. Despite publications on these measures in the oncology literature, there is limited evidence-based research to demonstrate the utility of CGA by practicing oncology providers and how to implement it into practice.