Key stakeholders' views on the quality of care and services available to frail seniors in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Frail seniors often receive ineffective care, which does not meet their needs. It is still unclear how healthcare systems should be redesigned to be more sensitive to the needs and values of frail seniors and their caregivers. We thus aimed to describe key stakeholders' perspectives on the current healthcare and services available to frail seniors. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of 42 frail seniors, caregivers, clinicians, or healthcare administrators/decision makers involved in frail senior care from five Canadian provinces. We explored participants' perspectives on the quality of care and services for frail seniors. We used an inductive/deductive thematic data analysis approach based on the Square-of-Care model, including emerging themes using the constant comparison method. RESULTS: We grouped participants' perspectives into strengths, weaknesses and opportunities for improvement, and then into nine themes: care processes, continuity of care, social frailty, access to healthcare and services, models of healthcare delivery, cost of care, healthcare staff management and professional development of healthcare providers, material resources and environmental design of healthcare facilities, and coordination of care. Our findings suggest redesigning assessment, communication with frail seniors and their caregivers, targeting care and services to the needs, and integrating care better across settings and in time. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic identification of frail older people is the first step to adapt healthcare systems to this population's needs. Participation of frail older people and their caregivers to decision making would also allow choosing care plans meeting their care goals. The integration of care and services across settings, over time, and with various providers, is also needed to meet frail senior needs.

Guidelines for dementia or Parkinson's disease with depression or anxiety: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety remain under-diagnosed and under-treated in those with neurologic diseases such as dementia or Parkinson's Disease (PD). Our objectives were to first, to provide a synthesis of high quality guidelines available for the identification and management of depression or anxiety in those with dementia or PD. Second, to identify areas for improvement for future guidelines. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE (2009 to July 24, 2015), grey literature (83 sources; July 24-Sept 6, 2015), and bibliographies of included studies. Included studies were evaluated for quality by four independent reviewers the AGREE II tool. Guideline characteristics, statements and recommendations relevant to depression or anxiety for dementia and PD were then extracted. (PROSPERO CRD: 42016014584) RESULTS: 8121 citations were reviewed with 31 full text articles included for assessment with the AGREE II tool. 17 were of sufficient quality for inclusion. Mean overall quality scores were between 4.25 to 6.5. Domain scores were lowest in the areas of stakeholder involvement, applicability, and editorial independence. Recommendations for the screening and diagnosis of depression were found for PD and dementia. There was little evidence to guide diagnosis or management of anxiety. Non-pharmacologic therapies were recommended for dementia patients. Most advocated pharmacologic treatment for depression, for both PD and dementia, but did not specify an agent due to lack of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The available recent high quality guidelines outline several recommendations for the management of comorbid depression or anxiety in PD or dementia. However there remain significant gaps in the evidence.

Geriatric Assessment in the Era of Targeted and Immunotherapy.

Cancer is a disease that mostly affects older adults and because of the aging of the population, the number of older adults diagnosed with cancer will increase significantly around the world. With increasing age, more older adults are living with frailty, and this may impact the tolerability of cancer treatments. International guidelines, such as the American Society for Clinical Oncology geriatric oncology guideline, recommend a geriatric assessment and management for all older adults with cancer to support the treatment decision-making process as well as develop a plan for supportive care interventions to support the older adults during cancer treatments. While there is clinical trial evidence to support a geriatric assessment and management for older adults receiving chemotherapy, there is less evidence to support a geriatric assessment for older adults starting immunotherapy. There are increasing numbers of new immunotherapies and targeted therapies available for older adults with cancer but often few older adults have been included in the clinical trials, leaving less evidence for clinicians to guide treatment decisions. In this current opinion, we review the current evidence on the use of a geriatric assessment and management in the context of immunotherapy and targeted therapy. We review how a geriatric assessment could support older adults making treatment decisions for immunotherapy, review how geriatric assessment parameters are linked with outcomes and provide guidance on how geriatric assessment can guide the supportive care plan during immunotherapy treatment.

Gaps in Addressing Cardiovascular Risk in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Assessing Performance Using Cardiovascular Quality Indicators.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major comorbidity for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study sought to determine the performance of 11 recently developed CVD quality indicators (QI) for RA in clinical practice. METHODS: Medical charts for patients with RA (early disease or biologic-treated) followed at 1 center were retrospectively reviewed. A systematic assessment of adherence to 11 QI over a 2-year period was completed. Performance on the QI was reported as a percentage pass rate. RESULTS: There were 170 charts reviewed (107 early disease and 63 biologic-treated). The most frequent CVD risk factors present at diagnosis (early disease) and biologic start (biologic-treated) included hypertension (26%), obesity (25%), smoking (21%), and dyslipidemia (15%). Performance on the CVD QI was highly variable. Areas of low performance (< 10% pass rates) included documentation of a formal CVD risk assessment, communication to the primary care physician (PCP) that patients with RA were at increased risk of CVD, body mass index documentation and counseling if overweight, communication to a PCP about an elevated blood pressure, and discussion of risks and benefits of antiinflammatories in patients at CVD risk. Rates of diabetes screening and lipid screening were 67% and 69%, respectively. The area of highest performance was observed for documentation of intent to taper corticosteroids (98%-100% for yrs 1 and 2, respectively). CONCLUSION: Gaps in CVD risk management were found and highlight the need for quality improvements. Key targets for improvement include coordination of CVD care between rheumatology and primary care, and communication of increased CVD risk in RA.