Where are we in perioperative medicine for older surgical patients? A UK survey of geriatric medicine delivered services in surgery.

INTRODUCTION: national reports have highlighted deficiencies in care provided to older surgical patients and suggested a role for innovative, collaborative, inter-specialty models of care. The extent of geriatrician-led perioperative services in the UK (excluding orthogeriatric services) has not previously been described. This survey describes current services and explores barriers to further development. METHODS: an electronic survey was sent to clinical leads for geriatric medicine at all 161 acute NHS health care trusts in the UK. Reminders were sent on three occasions over an 8-week period. The survey examined preoperative and postoperative care and organisational issues. Responses were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: there were 130 respondents (80.7%). One-third (38) of respondents described providing some geriatric medicine input in older surgical patients. Preoperative services existed in 15 (12%), where 14 provided risk assessment and 13 preoperative optimisation. Twenty-six respondents (20%) delivered care postoperatively, of them 10 took a reactive approach, 11 a proactive approach and 5 provided a combination of reactive and proactive care. Barriers to establishing perioperative geriatric medicine services included funding, workforce issues and a lack of inter-specialty collaboration. CONCLUSION: a national appetite exists to provide geriatrician-led services to older surgical patients yet the majority of existing services remain reactive and do not use comprehensive geriatric assessment as an organising principle. This survey suggests that funding for geriatricians in perioperative care has not yet been universally established. Future efforts should focus on dissemination of experiential knowledge and published resources, collaboration with commissioners and empirical research to overcome the barriers described.

Health status of UK care home residents: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: UK care home residents are often poorly served by existing healthcare arrangements. Published descriptions of residents' health status have been limited by lack of detail and use of data derived from surveys drawn from social, rather than health, care records. AIM: to describe in detail the health status and healthcare resource use of UK care home residents DESIGN AND SETTING: a 180-day longitudinal cohort study of 227 residents across 11 UK care homes, 5 nursing and 6 residential, selected to be representative for nursing/residential status and dementia registration. METHOD: Barthel index (BI), Mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Neuropsychiatric index (NPI), Mini-nutritional index (MNA), EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D), 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), diagnoses and medications were recorded at baseline and BI, NPI, GHQ-12 and EQ-5D at follow-up after 180 days. National Health Service (NHS) resource use data were collected from databases of local healthcare providers. RESULTS: out of a total of 323, 227 residents were recruited. The median BI was 9 (IQR: 2.5-15.5), MMSE 13 (4-22) and number of medications 8 (5.5-10.5). The mean number of diagnoses per resident was 6.2 (SD: 4). Thirty per cent were malnourished, 66% had evidence of behavioural disturbance. Residents had contact with the NHS on average once per month. CONCLUSION: residents from both residential and nursing settings are dependent, cognitively impaired, have mild frequent behavioural symptoms, multimorbidity, polypharmacy and frequently use NHS resources. Effective care for such a cohort requires broad expertise from multiple disciplines delivered in a co-ordinated and managed way.

UK medical teaching about ageing is improving but there is still work to be done: the Second National Survey of Undergraduate Teaching in Ageing and Geriatric Medicine.

INTRODUCTION: in 2008, a UK national survey of undergraduate teaching about ageing and geriatric medicine identified deficiencies, including failure to adequately teach about elder abuse, pressure ulcers and bio- and social gerontology. We repeated the survey in 2013 to consider whether the situation had improved. METHOD: the deans of all 31 UK medical schools were invited to nominate a respondent with an overview of their undergraduate curriculum. Nominees were invited by email and letter to complete an online questionnaire quantifying topics taught, type of teaching and assessment undertaken, and the amount of time spent on teaching. RESULTS: one school only taught pre-clinical medicine and declined to participate. Of the 30 remaining schools, 20 responded and 19 provided analysable data. The majority of the schools (95-100%) provided teaching in delirium, dementia, stroke, falls, osteoporosis, extra-pyramidal disorders, polypharmacy, incontinence, ethics and mental capacity. Only 68% of the schools taught about elder abuse. Thirty-seven per cent taught a recognised classification of the domains of health used in Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). The median (range) total time spent on teaching in ageing and geriatric medicine was 55.5 (26-192) h. There was less reliance on informal teaching and improved assessment:teaching ratios compared with the 2008 survey. CONCLUSIONS: there was an improvement in teaching and assessment of learning outcomes in ageing and geriatric medicine for UK undergraduates between 2008 and 2013. However, further work is needed to increase the amount of teaching time devoted to ageing and to improve teaching around elder abuse and the domains of health used in CGA.