Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 18 de 18
1.
J Palliat Med ; 27(4): 487-494, 2024 Apr.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38330403

Background: Terminological problems concerning sedation in palliative care and consequences for research and clinical decision making have been reported frequently. Objectives: To gather data on the application of definitions of sedation practices in palliative care to clinical cases and to analyze implications for high-quality definitions. Design: We conducted an online survey with a convenience sample of international experts involved in the development of guidelines on sedation in palliative care and members of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC). Participants were asked to apply four published definitions to four case vignettes. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 32 experts and 271 EAPC members completed the survey. The definitions were applied correctly in n = 2200/4848 cases (45.4%). The mean number of correct applications of the definitions (4 points max.) was 2.2 ± 1.14 for the definition of the SedPall study group, 1.8 ± 1.03 for the EAPC definition, 1.7 ± 0.98 for the definition of the Norwegian Medical Association, and 1.6 ± 1.01 for the definition of the Japanese Society of Palliative Medicine. The rate of correct applications for the 16 vignette-definition pairs varied between 70/303 (23.1%) and 227/303 (74.9%). The content of definitions and vignettes together with free-text comments explains participants' decisions and misunderstandings. Conclusions: Definitions of sedation in palliative care are frequently incorrectly applied to clinical case scenarios under simplified conditions. This suggests that clinical communication and research might be negatively influenced by misunderstandings and inconsistent labeling or reporting of data. Clinical Trial Registration Number: DRKS00015047.


Deep Sedation , Hospice and Palliative Care Nursing , Palliative Medicine , Humans , Palliative Care , Surveys and Questionnaires , Communication
2.
Cancer Med ; 12(23): 21335-21353, 2023 12.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37902232

INTRODUCTION: Early palliative care (EPC) has been advocated to improve cancer patients' health. However, EPC differs with regard to its elements and target groups. It is not known which parts of EPC contribute to effectiveness for which patient group. This scoping review provides a structured analysis of EPC interventions and outcome measures. DESIGN: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL up to February 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT), nonrandomized trials, cohort studies (CS), and controlled before-after studies of EPC in adult patients in English, Dutch, and German language. Interventions had to be self-labeled as EPC. Screening and data extraction were performed by two raters. A structured analysis incorporating the TIDieR checklist was performed to describe the elements of the interventions. RESULTS: We screened 2651 articles, resulting in 40 articles being included: 34 studies were RCT and six studies were CS with a mean sample size of 208 patients. Patients with pancreatic (n = 10) and lung cancer (n = 9) were most often included. Studies reported different reference points for the onset of EPC such as time after diagnosis of incurable cancer (n = 18) or prognosis (n = 9). Thirteen studies provided information about elements of EPC and eight studies about the control intervention. Most frequent elements of EPC were symptom management (n = 28), case management (n = 16), and advance care planning (ACP; n = 15). Most frequently reported outcome measures were health-related quality of life (n = 26), symptom intensity (n = 6), resource use, and the patient's mood (n = 4 each). CONCLUSION: The elicited heterogeneity of ECP in combination with deficits of reporting are considerable barriers that should be addressed to further develop effective EPC interventions for different groups of cancer patients.


Lung Neoplasms , Palliative Care , Adult , Humans , Affect , Palliative Care/methods , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
3.
Trials ; 24(1): 136, 2023 Feb 23.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36814350

BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual disabilities have a higher prevalence of unhealthy eating habits, stress, low levels of mobility, and comparable drug consumption as the general population. Consequently, they suffer from several chronic diseases earlier and more often, but there are fewer prevention and health promotion services including this population. The goal of this study is to determine if an advanced practice nursing approach in the community with home visits is an effective way to improve the health status of adults with intellectual disabilities. METHODS: We will conduct a randomized-controlled trial with waiting list design in Hamburg, Germany. Inclusion criteria are diagnosis ICD F70-F79 and exclusion criteria are care level > 3 according to the German Social Code XI or being at the end-of-life. Participants will be block randomized. The intervention consists of advanced practice nurses performing case management, social space analysis, prevention planning, and counseling through four outreach home visits on nutrition, mobility, addiction, and stress. Comparison is usual care. The primary outcome is health status (WHODAS) after 12 months. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) and resilience (RS-11) after 6 and 12 months. The calculated sample size is 256 with an estimated dropout of 30%. Raters and analysts will be blinded. Analysis will be performed using ANCOVAs. DISCUSSION: By providing case management and utilizing their nursing expertise, advanced practice nurses will provide valuable input and guidance on prevention and health promotion for people with intellectual disabilities. They will close the gap between health and social care, which is prominent in Germany, through cooperation between the existing care sectors. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00028771 , registered 4 July 2022, Universal Trial Number: U1111-1277-0595.


Intellectual Disability , Humans , Adult , Case Management , Quality of Life , Germany , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
4.
Cancer Med ; 12(2): 1813-1820, 2023 01.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35770954

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients form a notable proportion of requestors for physician-assisted suicide (PAS). This manuscript provides data on German oncologists' views concerning due criteria for the assessment of requests for PAS and quality assurance. METHODS: The German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) has conducted a survey among its members to elicit data about practices and views on regulating PAS in March 2021. Descriptive analysis and bivariate logistic regression of quantitative data on socio-demographic and other determinants possibly associated with respondents' views on PAS as well as content analysis of qualitative data were performed. RESULTS: About 57.1% (n = 425) of respondents (n = 745) indicated that they had been asked for information about PAS by patients. Information about palliative (92.7%; n = 651) and psychological care options (85.6%; n = 598) was deemed most important in cases of requests for PAS. More than half of the respondents (57.6%; n = 429) were in favour of a formal expert assessment of decisional capacity and about 33.4% (n = 249) favoured a time span of 14 days between the counselling and prescription of a lethal drug. There was no association between participants who received more requests and a preference for disclosing publicly their willingness to assist with suicide. A majority of respondents requested measures of quality assurance (71.3%; n = 531). CONCLUSION: According to respondents' views, the regulation of PAS will require diligent procedures regarding the assessment of decisional capacity and counselling. The findings suggest that the development of adequate and feasible criteria to assess the quality of practices is an important task.


Euthanasia , Oncologists , Suicide, Assisted , Humans , Suicide, Assisted/psychology , Euthanasia/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Medical Oncology , Attitude of Health Personnel
6.
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol ; 72(8): 354-361, 2022 Aug.
Article De | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35213903

OBJECTIVE: Different options to regulate decisions about organ transplantation were subjected to discussions prior to parliamentary decision on 16.01.2020. The goal of this study was the description of citizens' attitudes towards organ donation and investigation of predictors of (documentation of) willingness to donate. METHODS: Cross sectional online survey in Berlin and Saxony-Anhalt between 25.11.2019 till 16.01.2020. Descriptive, statistical analysis. We report absolute and relative frequencies. We conducted logistic regression analysis for the influence of age, income and gender on knowledge, willingness to donate and possession of an organ donor card. RESULTS: Of 20 020 invited citizens, 676 (3.4%) participated in the online survey; 54.9% were in favour of an opt-out regulation, 49.4% supported an opt-in regulation, 63.3% of respondents were willing or rather willing to donate an organ and 43.2% possessed an organ donor card. Willingness to donate and possession of an organ donor card decreased with increasing age. A Higher educational level was associated with having an organ donor card. Gender, income, education and knowledge about organ donation were not associated with the willingness to donate an organ. Of those who were willing to donate but who had not a donor card, 45.7% had communicated their will to relatives. Reasons indicated for lack of documentation included practical reasons as also fears related to medical care in case of critical health state. DISCUSSION: None of the discussed legislative regulations on organ donation has been supported by a clear majority of respondents. Distinct population-based surveys can serve as starting point for developing targeted initiatives to increase the documentation of citizens' will regarding organ donation following brain death.


Organ Transplantation , Tissue and Organ Procurement , Attitude , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires
7.
J Med Ethics ; 48(6): 401-406, 2022 06.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34006601

Evaluation of clinical ethical case consultations has been discussed as an important research task in recent decades. A rigid framework of evaluation is essential to improve quality of consultations and, thus, quality of patient care. Different approaches to evaluate those services appropriately and to determine adequate empirical endpoints have been proposed. A key challenge is to provide an answer to the question as to which empirical endpoints-and for what reasons-should be considered when evaluating the quality of a service. In this paper, we argue for an approach that adopts the role of ethics consultants as its point of departure. In a first step, we describe empirical and ethical characteristics of evaluating clinical ethical case. We show that the mode of action and the explicit normative character of the interventions constitute two characteristics which pose challenges to the selection of appropriate quality criteria and require special attention. In a second step, we outline the way in which an analysis of the role of ethics consultants in the context of a clinical ethical case consultation services can account for the existing challenges by linking empirically measurable endpoints with normative theory. Finally, we discuss practical implications of our model for evaluation research.


Ethicists , Ethics Consultation , Delivery of Health Care , Ethics, Clinical , Ethics, Medical , Humans , Morals , Referral and Consultation
8.
BMC Med Ethics ; 22(1): 99, 2021 07 23.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34301238

BACKGROUND: Clinical ethics case consultations (CECCs) provide a structured approach in situations of ethical uncertainty or conflicts. There have been increasing calls in recent years to assess the quality of CECCs by means of empirical research. This study provides detailed data of a descriptive quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a CECC service in a department of cardiology and intensive care at a German university hospital. METHODS: Semi-structured document analysis of CECCs was conducted in the period of November 1, 2018, to May 31, 2020. All documents were analysed by two researchers independently. RESULTS: Twenty-four CECCs were requested within the study period, of which most (n = 22; 92%) had been initiated by physicians of the department. The patients were an average of 79 years old (R: 43-96), and 14 (58%) patients were female. The median length of stay prior to request was 12.5 days (R: 1-65 days). The most frequent diagnoses (several diagnoses possible) were cardiology-related (n = 29), followed by sepsis (n = 11) and cancer (n = 6). Twenty patients lacked decisional capacity. The main reason for a CECC request was uncertainty about the balancing of potential benefit and harm related to the medically indicated treatment (n = 18). Further reasons included differing views regarding the best individual treatment option between health professionals and patients (n = 3) or between different team members (n = 3). Consensus between participants could be reached in 18 (75%) consultations. The implementation of a disease specific treatment intervention was recommended in five cases. Palliative care and limitation of further disease specific interventions was recommended in 12 cases. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first in-depth evaluation of a CECC service set up for an academic department of cardiology and intensive medical care. Patient characteristics and the issues deliberated during CECC provide a starting point for the development and testing of more tailored clinical ethics support services and research on CECC outcomes.


Cardiology , Ethics Consultation , Aged , Critical Care , Ethics, Clinical , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Referral and Consultation
9.
JMIR Aging ; 4(1): e25307, 2021 Jan 20.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33470935

BACKGROUND: Assistive technologies for people with dementia and their relatives have the potential to ensure, improve, and facilitate home care and thereby enhance the health of the people caring or being cared for. The number and diversity of technologies and research have continuously increased over the past few decades. As a result, the research field has become complex. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the research on technology-assisted home care for people with dementia and their relatives in order to guide further research and technology development. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following a published framework and by searching 4 databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and CENTRAL) for studies published between 2013 and 2018. We included qualitative and quantitative studies in English or German focusing on technologies that support people with dementia or their informal carers in the home care setting. Studies that targeted exclusively people with mild cognitive impairment, delirium, or health professionals were excluded as well as studies that solely consisted of assessments without implication for the people with dementia or their relatives and prototype developments. We mapped the research field regarding study design, study aim, setting, sample size, technology type, and technology aim, and we report relative and absolute frequencies. RESULTS: From an initial 5328 records, we included 175 studies. We identified a variety of technology types including computers, telephones, smartphones, televisions, gaming consoles, monitoring devices, ambient assisted living, and robots. Assistive technologies were most commonly used by people with dementia (77/175, 44.0%), followed by relatives (68/175, 38.9%), and both target groups (30/175, 17.1%). Their most frequent goals were to enable or improve care, provide therapy, or positively influence symptoms of people with dementia (eg, disorientation). The greatest proportions of studies were case studies and case series (72/175, 41.1%) and randomized controlled trials (44/175, 25.1%). The majority of studies reported small sample sizes of between 1 and 50 participants (122/175, 69.7%). Furthermore, most of the studies analyzed the effectiveness (85/233, 36.5%) of the technology, while others targeted feasibility or usability or were explorative. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated the variety of technologies that support people with dementia and their relatives in the home care setting. Whereas this diversity provides the opportunity for needs-oriented technical solutions that fit individual care arrangements, it complicates the choice of the right technology. Therefore, research on the users' informational needs is required. Moreover, there is a need for larger studies on the technologies' effectiveness that could contribute to a higher acceptance and thus to a transition of technologies from research into the daily lives of people with dementia and their relatives.

12.
Nurs Ethics ; 27(3): 838-854, 2020 May.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31742473

BACKGROUND: Clinical ethics support services have been advocated in recent decades. In clinical practice, clinical ethics support services are often requested for difficult decisions near the end of life. However, their contribution to improving healthcare has been questioned and demands for evaluation have been put forward. Research indicates that there are considerable challenges associated with defining adequate outcomes for clinical ethics support services. In this systematic review, we report findings of qualitative studies and surveys, which have been conducted to evaluate clinical ethics support services near the end of life. METHODS: Electronic databases and other sources were queried from 1970 to May 2018. Two authors screened studies independently. Methodological quality of studies was assessed. For each arm of the review, an individual synthesis was performed. Prospero ID: CRD42016036241. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethical approval is not needed as it is a systematic review of published literature. RESULTS: In all, 2088 hits on surveys and 2786 on qualitative studies were found. After screening, nine surveys and four qualitative studies were included. Survey studies report overall positive findings using a very wide and heterogeneous range of outcomes. Negative results were reported only occasionally. However, methodological quality and conceptual justification of used outcomes was often weak and limits generalizability of results. CONCLUSION: Evidence points to positive outcomes of clinical ethics support services. However, methodological quality needs to be improved. Further qualitative or mixed-method research on evaluating clinical ethics support services may contribute to the development of evaluating outcomes of clinical ethics support services by means of broaden the range of appropriate (process-oriented) outcomes of (different types of) clinical ethics support services.


Ethics Consultation/standards , Terminal Care/ethics , Ethicists , Humans , Terminal Care/psychology
13.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 7: CD012636, 2019 07 22.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31424106

BACKGROUND: Decisions in clinical medicine can be associated with ethical challenges. Ethical case interventions (e.g. ethics committee, moral case deliberation) identify and analyse ethical conflicts which occur within the context of care for patients. Ethical case interventions involve ethical experts, different health professionals as well as the patient and his/her family. The aim is to support decision-making in clinical practice. This systematic review gathered and critically appraised the available evidence of controlled studies on the effectiveness of ethical case interventions. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ethical case interventions result in reduced decisional conflict or moral distress of those affected by an ethical conflict in clinical practice; improved patient involvement in decision-making and a higher quality of life in adult patients. To determine the most effective models of ethical case interventions and to analyse the use and appropriateness of the outcomes in experimental studies. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases for primary studies to September 2018: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched CDSR and DARE for related reviews. Furthermore, we searched Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal and conducted a cited reference search for all included studies in ISI WEB of Science. We also searched the references of the included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies which compared ethical case interventions with usual care or an active control in any language. The included population were adult patients. However, studies with mixed populations consisting of adults and children were included, if a subgroup or sensitivity analysis (or both) was performed for the adult population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care review group. We used meta-analysis based on a random-effects model for treatment costs and structured analysis for the remaining outcomes, because these were heterogeneously reported. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised trials published in six articles. The publication dates ranged from 2000 to 2014. Three studies were conducted in the USA, and one study in Taiwan. All studies were conducted on intensive care units and included 1165 patients. We judged the included studies to be of moderate or high risk of bias. It was not possible to compare different models of the intervention regarding effectiveness due to the diverse character of the interventions and the small number of studies. Included studies did not directly measure the main outcomes. All studies received public funding and one received additional funding from private sources.We identified two models of ethical case interventions: proactive and request-based ethics consultation. Three studies evaluated proactive ethics consultation (n = 1103) of which one study reported findings on one key outcome criterion. The studies did not report data on decisional conflict, moral distress of participants of ethical case interventions, patient involvement in decision-making, quality of life or ethical competency for proactive ethics consultation. One study assessed satisfaction with care on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = lowest rating, 5 = highest rating). The healthcare providers (nurses and physicians, n = 365) scored a value of 4 or 5 for 81.4% in the control group and 86.1% in the intervention group (P > 0.05). The patients or their surrogates (n = 275) scored a value of 4 or 5 for 83.6% in the control group and for 74.8% in the intervention group (P > 0.05). It was uncertain whether proactive ethics consultation led to high satisfaction with care, because the certainty of evidence was very low.One study evaluated request-based ethics consultation (n = 62). The study indirectly measured decisional conflict by assessing consensus regarding patient care. The risk (increase in consensus, reduction in decisional conflict) increased by 80% as a result of the intervention. The risk ratio was 0.20 (95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.46; P < 0.01). It was uncertain whether request-based ethics consultation reduced decisional conflict, because the certainty of evidence was very low. The study did not report data on moral distress of participants of ethical case interventions, patient involvement in decision-making, quality of life, or ethical competency or satisfaction with care for request-based ethics consultation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to determine the effectiveness of ethical case interventions with certainty due to the low certainty of the evidence of included studies in this review. The effectiveness of ethical case interventions should be investigated in light of the outcomes reported in this systematic review. In addition, there is need for further research to identify and measure outcomes which reflect the goals of different types of ethical case intervention.

14.
BMC Med Ethics ; 20(1): 48, 2019 07 15.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31307458

BACKGROUND: Evaluating clinical ethics support services (CESS) has been hailed as important research task. At the same time, there is considerable debate about how to evaluate CESS appropriately. The criticism, which has been aired, refers to normative as well as empirical aspects of evaluating CESS. MAIN BODY: In this paper, we argue that a first necessary step for progress is to better understand the intervention(s) in CESS. Tools of complex intervention research methodology may provide relevant means in this respect. In a first step, we introduce principles of "complex intervention research" and show how CESS fulfil the criteria of "complex interventions". In a second step, we develop a generic "conceptual framework" for "ethics consultation on request" as standard for many forms of ethics consultation in clinical ethics practice. We apply this conceptual framework to the model of "bioethics mediation" to make explicit the specific structural and procedural elements of this form of ethics consultation on request. In a final step we conduct a comparative analysis of two different types of CESS, which have been subject to evaluation research: "proactive ethics consultation" and "moral case deliberation" and discuss implications for evaluating both types of CESS. CONCLUSION: To make explicit different premises of implemented CESS interventions by means of conceptual frameworks can inform the search for sound empirical evaluation of CESS. In addition, such work provides a starting point for further reflection about what it means to offer "good" CESS.


Ethics Committees, Clinical , Health Services Research/ethics , Ethics Committees, Clinical/standards , Ethics Consultation/standards , Ethics, Clinical , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Humans , Morals
16.
BMC Palliat Care ; 16(1): 3, 2017 Jan 17.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28095908

BACKGROUND: Limiting treatment forms part of practice in many fields of medicine. There is a scarcity of robust data from Germany. Therefore, in this paper, we report results of a survey among German physicians with a focus on frequencies, aspects of decision making and determinants of limiting treatment with expected or intended shortening of life. METHODS: Postal survey among a random sample of physicians working in the area of five German state chambers of physicians using a modified version of the questionnaire of the EURELD Consortium. Information requested referred to the patients who died most recently within the last 12 months. Logistic regression was performed to analyse associations between characteristics of physicians and patients regarding limitation of treatment with expected or intended shortening of life. RESULTS: As reported elsewhere, 734 physicians responded (response rate 36.9%) and of these, 174 (43.2%) reported a withholding and 144 (35.7%) a withdrawal of treatment. Eighty one physicians estimated that there was at least some shortening of life as a consequence. In 25.9% of these cases hastening death had been discussed with the patient at the time or immediately prior to this action. Types of treatment most frequently limited was artificial nutrition (n = 35). Bivariate analysis indicates that limitation of treatment with possible or intended shortening of life for patients aged > 75 years is performed significantly more often (p = 0.007, OR 1.848). There was significantly less limitation of treatment in patients who died from cancer compared to patients with other causes of death (p = 0.01, OR 0.486). There was no significant statistical association with physicians' religion, palliative care qualification or frequencies of limiting treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to recent research from other European countries, limitation of treatment with expected or intended shortening of life is frequently performed amongst the investigated sample. The role of clinical and non-medical aspects possibly relevant for physicians' decision about withholding or withdrawal of treatment with possible or intended shortening of life and reasons for non-involvement of patients should be explored in more detail by means of mixed method and interdisciplinary empirical-ethical analysis.


Patient Participation , Terminal Care/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Attitude of Health Personnel , Clinical Decision-Making/ethics , Cross-Sectional Studies , Ethics, Medical , Female , Germany , Humans , Life Expectancy , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/ethics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Terminal Care/ethics , Withholding Treatment/ethics , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data
17.
BMC Geriatr ; 16: 40, 2016 Feb 09.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26860991

BACKGROUND: Joint contractures are a common health problem in older persons with significant impact on activities of daily living. We aimed to retrieve outcome measures applied in studies on older persons with joint contractures and to identify and categorise the concepts contained in these outcome measures using the ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health) as a reference. METHODS: Electronic searches of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Pedro and the Cochrane Library were conducted (1/2002-8/2012). We included studies in the geriatric rehabilitation and nursing home settings with participants aged ≥ 65 years and with acquired joint contractures. Two independent reviewers extracted the outcome measures and transferred them to concepts using predefined conceptual frameworks. Concepts were subsequently linked to the ICF categories. RESULTS: From the 1057 abstracts retrieved, 60 studies met the inclusion criteria. We identified 52 single outcome measures and 24 standardised assessment instruments. A total of 1353 concepts were revealed from the outcome measures; 96.2% could be linked to 50 ICF categories in the 2nd level; 3.8% were not categorised. Fourteen of the 50 categories (28%) belonged to the component Body Functions, 4 (8%) to the component Body Structures, 26 (52%) to the component Activities and Participation, and 6 (12%) to the component Environmental Factors. CONCLUSIONS: The ICF is a valuable reference for identifying and quantifying the concepts of outcome measures on joint contractures in older people. The revealed ICF categories remain to be validated in populations with joint contractures in terms of clinical relevance and personal impact.


Contracture/classification , Disability Evaluation , Disabled Persons/classification , International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health/standards , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Activities of Daily Living/classification , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arthritis/classification , Arthritis/diagnosis , Arthritis/rehabilitation , Contracture/diagnosis , Contracture/rehabilitation , Disabled Persons/rehabilitation , Female , Humans , Male , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods
18.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr ; 61(1): 61-6, 2015.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25937031

INTRODUCTION: Joint contractures are characterized as impairment of the physiological movement of joints due to deformity, disuse or pain and have major impact especially for older individuals in geriatric care. Some measures for the assessment of the impact of joint contractures exist. However, there is no consensus on which aspects should constantly be measured. Our objective was to develop a standard-set based on the ICF for describing functioning and disability in older individuals with joint contractures in geriatric care settings, giving special emphasis to activities and participation. METHODS: The ICF-based standard set was developed in a formal decision-making and consensus process and based on an adapted version of the protocol to develop ICF Core Sets. These are sets of categories from the ICF, serving as standards for the assessment, communication and reporting of functioning and health for clinical studies, clinical encounters and multi-professional comprehensive assessment and management. RESULTS: Twenty-three experts from Germany and Switzerland selected 105 categories of the ICF component Activities and Participation for the ICF-based standard set. The largest number of categories was selected from the chapter Mobility (50 categories, 47.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The standard set for older individuals with joint contractures provides health professionals with a standard for describing patients' activity limitations and participation restrictions. The standard set also provides a common basis for the development of patient-centered measures and intervention programs. The preliminary version of the ICF-based standard set will be tested in subsequent studies with regard to its psychometric properties.


Activities of Daily Living , Contracture/classification , Disability Evaluation , Disabled Persons/rehabilitation , Geriatric Assessment , Joint Diseases/classification , Aged , Contracture/rehabilitation , Female , Germany , Humans , Joint Diseases/rehabilitation , Male
...