Exploring How Personal, Social, and Institutional Characteristics Contribute to Geriatric Medicine Subspecialty Decisions: A Qualitative Study of Trainees' Perceptions.

PURPOSE: To explore internal medicine residents' and geriatrics fellows' perceptions of how personal, social, and institutional characteristics contribute to their professional identity and subspecialty decisions related to geriatric medicine. METHOD: The authors conducted 23 in-depth, semistructured interviews with internal medicine residents, with and without an interest in geriatrics, and geriatrics fellows across 3 academic medical centers in the United States from October 2018 through June 2019. They then used a qualitative narrative approach to analyze the interview data. RESULTS: Trainees related personal experiences, such as exposure to physicians and experiences with grandparents, to their interest in medicine. Trainees with an interest in geriatrics at 2 institutions did not feel supported, or understood, by peers and mentors in their respective institutions but maintained their interest in the field. The following variations between institutions that are supportive and those that are not were noted: the number of geriatricians, the proximity of the institution to geriatrics clinics, and the ways in which institutional leaders portrayed the prestige of geriatric medicine. Institutional characteristics influenced trainees' understanding of what it meant to be a doctor, what meaning they garnered from work as a physician, and their comfort with different types of complexity, such as those presented when providing care to older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Institutional characteristics may be particularly important in shaping trainee interest in geriatric medicine. Institutions should encourage leadership training and opportunities for geriatricians so they can serve as role models and as hands-on mentors for trainees beginning in medical school. Increasing the number of geriatricians requires institutions to increase the value they place on geriatrics to generate a positive interest in this field among trainees. Institutions facilitating formation of professional identity and sense of purpose in work may consider engaging geriatricians in leadership and mentoring roles as well as curriculum development.

Medication reviews in hospitalized patients: a qualitative study on perceptions of primary and secondary care providers on interprofessional collaboration.

BACKGROUND: In-hospital medication reviews are regularly performed. However, discontinuity in care could occur because secondary care providers lack insight into the outpatient history. Furthermore, for the implementation or follow-up of some medication review-based interventions, the help of primary care providers is essential. This requires interprofessional collaboration between secondary and primary care. Therefore, the aim of this qualitative study was to gain insight into the perceptions of primary and secondary care providers on interprofessional collaboration on medication reviews in hospitalised patients. METHODS: Ten face-to-face semi-structured interviews and three focus group discussions were conducted with 20 healthcare providers from three hospitals and community health services. The interviews were aimed at exploring general practitioners', community pharmacists', geriatricians', and hospital pharmacists' experiences, attitudes, and views of interprofessional collaboration. Focus groups consisted of representatives of all professional groups. Through group discussion, interprofessional collaboration was explored by addressing three main questions: 1) What are the benefits of in-hospital medication reviews? 2) What are the barriers to in-hospital medication reviews from an interprofessional collaboration perspective? 3) Given the barriers mentioned, how should this interprofessional collaboration between primary and secondary care be designed? Data were analysed using a thematic-content approach. RESULTS: The need for in-hospital medication reviews was underlined due to their many benefits, such as reducing potentially preventable re-admissions. Barriers regarding interprofessional collaboration between primary and secondary care can be subdivided into three main themes: 1) defining in-hospital medication reviews (e.g., lack of clear goals), 2) execution of medication reviews (e.g., hospital setting is dynamic), and 3) follow-up after discharge (e.g., unclear instructions). Care providers suggested solutions for each of the barriers mentioned, for example, by using supportive staff in order to overcome the gap between primary and secondary care providers and making clear agreements on proper means of communication. CONCLUSION: Primary and secondary care providers recognise the importance of in-hospital medication reviews and the need for interprofessional collaboration. To create satisfying interprofessional collaboration, conditions should be met on defining in-hospital medication reviews across settings and involving both primary and secondary care providers in implementing medication reviews and organising their follow-up.

The geriatric workforce in Romania: the need to improve data and management.

Facing severe under-funding and significant workforce maldistribution, the health system in Romania is challenged to provide adequate care for the ageing population. The aim of this article is to connect health labour market data of the geriatrics workforce in Romania with individual perceptions of front-line workers in geriatrics in order to better understand the 'human' factors of effective health workforce development. Comprehensive health workforce data are not available; we therefore used a rapid scoping review and interviews to combine quantitative and qualitative data sources, such as the 'Healthcare Facility Activity Report', policy documents and available reports. They show that despite a consistent increase in the overall number of geriatricians, their majority is based in Bucharest, the capital city. The initial review points to possible geriatrician burnout, caused in part by high workload. The geriatrics workforce in Romania is poorly developed. Significant efforts are still needed to create policies addressing inflows and outflows, training, maldistribution and inefficiencies related to their practice. Addressing burnout by improving teamwork and collaboration is vital for maintaining and improving the workforce morale and motivation. Two major policy recommendations emerged: an urgent need for better health workforce data in Romania and development of more effective workforce management.

The Geriatrician: The Frontline Specialist in the Treatment of COVID-19 Patients.

On February 20, 2020, a man living in the north of Italy was admitted to the emergency room with an atypical pneumonia that later proved to be COVID-19. This was the trigger of one of the most serious clusters of COVID-19 in the world, outside of China. Despite aggressive restraint and inhibition efforts, COVID-19 continues to increase, and the total number of infected patients in Italy is growing daily. After 6 weeks, the total number of patients reached 128,948 cases (April 5, 2020), with the higher case-fatality rate (15,887 deaths) dominated by old and very old patients. This sudden health emergency severely challenged the Italian Health System, in particular acute care hospitals and intensive care units. In 1 hospital, geriatric observation units were created, the experience of which can be extremely useful for European countries, the United States, and all countries that in the coming days will face a similar situation.

Physician Perspectives on Deprescribing Cardiovascular Medications for Older Adults.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Guideline-based management of cardiovascular disease often involves prescribing multiple medications, which contributes to polypharmacy and risk for adverse drug events in older adults. Deprescribing is a potential strategy to mitigate these risks. We sought to characterize and compare clinician perspectives regarding deprescribing cardiovascular medications across three specialties. DESIGN: National cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Ambulatory. PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of geriatricians, general internists, and cardiologists from the American College of Physicians. MEASUREMENTS: Electronic survey assessing clinical practice of deprescribing cardiovascular medications, reasons and barriers to deprescribing, and choice of medications to deprescribe in hypothetical clinical cases. RESULTS: In each specialty, 750 physicians were surveyed, with a response rate of 26% for geriatricians, 26% for general internists, and 12% for cardiologists. Over 80% of respondents within each specialty reported that they had recently considered deprescribing a cardiovascular medication. Adverse drug reactions were the most common reason for deprescribing for all specialties. Geriatricians also commonly reported deprescribing in the setting of limited life expectancy. Barriers to deprescribing were shared across specialties and included concerns about interfering with other physicians' treatment plans and patient reluctance. In hypothetical cases, over 90% of physicians in each specialty chose to deprescribe when patients experienced adverse drug reactions. Geriatricians were most likely and cardiologists were least likely to consider deprescribing cardiovascular medications in cases of limited life expectancy (all P < .001), such as recurrent metastatic cancer (84% of geriatricians, 68% of general internists, and 45% of cardiologists), Alzheimer dementia (92% of geriatricians, 81% of general internists, and 59% of cardiologists), or significant functional impairment (83% of geriatricians, 68% of general internists, and 45% of cardiologists). CONCLUSIONS: While barriers to deprescribing cardiovascular medications are shared across specialties, reasons for deprescribing, especially in the setting of limited life expectancy, varied. Implementing deprescribing will require improved processes for both physician-physician and physician-patient communication. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:78-86, 2019.

The Looming Geriatrician Shortage: Ramifications and Solutions.

Objective: Geriatricians are skilled in the recognition of asymptomatic and atypical presentations that occur in the elderly and provide comprehensive medication management including recognizing adverse drug events, reducing polypharmacy, and de-prescribing. However, despite the increasing average age of the U.S. population, with the number of individuals above 65 years old predicted to increase 55% by 2030, the geriatric workforce capacity in the United States has actually decreased from 10,270 in 2000 to 8,502 in 2010. Method: We describe physiologic changes in older adults, historical trends in geriatric training, and propose solutions for this looming crisis. Results: Many factors are responsible for the shortage of skilled geriatric providers. Discussion: We discuss the historical context of the lack of geriatricians including changes to the training system, describe the impact of expert geriatric care on patient care and health system outcomes, and propose methods to improve recruitment and retention for geriatric medicine.

Graduated compression stockings in prevention of venous thromboembolism among acutely ill medical patients aged over 75 years: a French national survey.

Background: The thromboprophylactic efficacy of graduated compression stockings (GCS) has not yet been demonstrated in acutely ill medical patients, and guidelines vary considerably. Older acutely ill medical patients appear to constitute a distinctive population presenting high risks of both thrombosis and bleeding. Objective: To evaluate the practices and beliefs of a panel of French geriatricians regarding GCS management in acutely ill medical patients aged over 75 years. Methods: A survey was designed to study French geriatric practice concerning GCS use for thromboprophylaxis. Results: A total of 111 geriatricians answered the questionnaire. Among the responders, 46% declared frequent or very frequent prescription of GCS for preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE) in acutely ill, hospitalized medical patients, 54% declaring that they frequently re-evaluated GCS prescription during the patient's hospitalization. The main reason reported for discontinuing GCS use was patient request. Regarding complications of GCS, 87% of responders declared having already noted adverse effects with the use of GCS, although 80% estimated the risk of complications to be low or very low. In the context considered, the efficacy of wearing GCS was believed to be high or very high for 73% of responders. GCS prescription was judged to be in accordance with evidence-based medicine for 69%. Conclusion: There is a gap between the frequent use of GCS to prevent VTE in older patients presenting an acute medical illness and the availability of data concerning their efficacy, safety, and management by nurses. Prospective trials including clinical and cost effectiveness are needed.

[Should older patients with cancer visit a geriatrician as well? The value of geriatric assessments]. / Ouderen met kanker ook naar geriater?

The value of geriatric assessments The ASCO guideline for Geriatric Oncology recommends submitting older patients with cancer to a geriatric assessment. Although we recognise the importance of awareness of geriatric problems in older patients with cancer, this approach where two different doctors are treating the same patient is not ideal for several reasons. We therefore recommend educating medical oncologists on geriatric problems, aging and different treatment goals.

Engaging knowledge users in a systematic review on the comparative effectiveness of geriatrician-led models of care is possible: A cross-sectional survey using the Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review (SR) was conducted to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of geriatrician-led models of care, and an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) approach facilitated SR relevance. Activities to engage knowledge users (KUs) in the SR were evaluated for perceived level of engagement. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: KUs included patients, caregivers, geriatricians, and policymakers from three Canadian provinces. Activities included 1) modified Delphi to select outcomes; 2) cross-sectional survey to select outcome measures, and 3) in-person meeting to discuss SR findings. KU engagement was assessed using the Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PEET) after the second and third activities. KUs rated the extent of successful engagement using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from "no extent" to "very large extent." RESULTS: In total, 15 KUs completed the PEET: eight geriatricians, four policymakers, two patients, and one caregiver. Median engagement scores across all activities (median range: 6.00-6.50) indicated that KUs felt engaged. Differences were observed for activity type; perceived engagement at in-person meeting resulted in higher meta-criteria scores for trust (P = 0.005), legitimacy (P = 0.003), fairness (P = 0.013), and competency (P = 0.035) compared with online activities. CONCLUSIONS: KUs can be engaged meaningfully in SR processes. Their perceived engagement was higher for in-person than for online activities.

A modified Delphi and cross-sectional survey to facilitate selection of optimal outcomes and measures for a systematic review on geriatrician-led care models.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify relevant outcomes and measures to inform a systematic review (SR) on the comparative effectiveness of geriatrician-led care models. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In the modified Delphi to select outcomes for inclusion in the SR, knowledge users (KUs) from Ontario, Alberta, and Saskatchewan rated outcome importance using a Likert scale. A survey was then completed by geriatricians to determine optimal measures for selected outcomes. Findings were analyzed using frequencies, means, and standard deviations (SDs). RESULTS: Thirty-three KUs (patients, caregivers, policymakers and geriatricians) rated 27 outcomes in round 1 of the modified Delphi. Top-rated outcomes included function (mean 6.85 ± SD 0.36), cognition (6.47 ± SD 0.72), and quality of life (6.38 ± SD 0.91). Twenty-three KUs participated in round 2 and rated 24 outcomes. Top-rated outcomes in round 2 were function (6.87 ± SD 0.34), quality of life (6.45 ± SD 1.10), and cognition (6.43 ± SD 0.73). The survey was completed by 22 geriatricians and the highest ranked measures were Activities of Daily Living (function), Mini-Mental State Examination (cognition), and the Medical Outcomes Study SF-36 (quality of life). CONCLUSION: We identified the most relevant outcomes and measures for patients, caregivers, policymakers, and geriatricians, allowing us to tailor the SR to KU needs.

Status of Geriatrics in 22 Countries.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to describe the current status of geriatrics and position of geriatricians in 22 countries of three continents, and to portray their attitudes towards and resources allocated to geriatrics. METHODS: An electronic survey was delivered to a convenience sample of 22 geriatricians in leading positions of their countries. RESULTS: The time required in post graduation specialist training to become a geriatrician varied from one year (subspecialty in the USA) to six years (independent specialty in Belgium). The number in the population aged 80+ per geriatrician varied from 450 (Austria) to 25,000 (Turkey). Of respondents, 55% reported that geriatrics is not a popular specialty in their country. Acute geriatric wards, rehabilitation and outpatient clinics were the most common working places for geriatricians. Nearly half of the respondents had an opinion that older patients who were acutely ill, were receiving subacute rehabilitation or had dementia should be cared for by geriatricians whereas half of the respondents would place geriatricians also in charge of nursing home and orthogeriatric patients. The biggest problems affecting older people's clinical care in their countries were: lack of geriatric knowledge, lack of geriatricians, and attitudes towards older people. Half of respondents thought that older people's health promotion and comprehensive geriatric assessment were not well implemented in their countries, although a majority felt that they could promote good geriatric care in their present position as a geriatrician. CONCLUSION: The position of geriatric, geriatricians' training and contents of work has wide international variety.

Defining doctoral gerontologists: Who are they and how are they contributing to the field of gerontology?

More than 300 individuals have earned doctoral degrees in gerontology since 1993, yet little is known about their training, professional placement, and contributions to the field. Given this lack of information, the authors sought to define the emerging mass of doctoral gerontologists. In this study, the authors analyzed results from the 2014 Gerontology Education Longitudinal Study survey sample of 84 individuals who earned a doctoral degree in gerontology between 1993 and 2013. Results revealed doctoral gerontologists completed training requirements that were consistent across eight programs offering doctorates in gerontology. The authors also found doctoral gerontologists have been successful in securing jobs in academic and nonacademic organizations, creating gerontological knowledge, and translating their work into other fields. The authors concluded by considering how the successful integration of doctoral gerontologists might continue, and they propose directions for future research.

[Interdisciplinary treatment in geriatric traumatology from the trauma surgeons' perspective : Results of a survey in Germany]. / Interdisziplinäre Behandlung in der Alterstraumatologie aus unfallchirurgischer Sicht : Ergebnisse einer deutschlandweiten Umfrage.

BACKGROUND: Many patients treated on trauma surgery wards are geriatric trauma patients. To improve treatment of these often multimorbid patients, various interdisciplinary treatment concepts have been established in Germany between trauma surgeons and geriatricians. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the dissemination and the impact of the different orthogeriatric treatment concepts for geriatric trauma in Germany. Material and methods In March and April 2014 an electronic questionnaire for assessing the interdisciplinary treatment of geriatric trauma patients was sent to 691 medical directors of trauma surgery departments in Germany. RESULTS: A total of 259 (37 %) fully answered questionnaires could be analyzed. The analysis revealed that 70 % of all responding trauma surgery departments had an orthogeriatric treatment cooperation. Most of them reported having patient discharge agreements to geriatric rehabilitation facilities (59 %). Geriatric counseling services were reported by 39 % while 24 % reported having regular interdisciplinary visits and orthogeriatric wards were available in 13 %. The need for orthogeriatric services was considered to be high by 79 % of the participants and benefits especially for the patients were expected. These expectations were largely fulfilled. More than 70 % of respondents planned to intensify the orthogeriatric cooperation. In this context difficulties were seen in the lack of personnel resources, especially in a lack of geriatricians. CONCLUSION: The results of this survey underline the impact and the positive experiences in orthogeriatric services. Solutions have to be found to address the emerging problem of capacity constraints.