Impact of Geriatric Consult Evaluations on Hospital Admission Rates for Older Adults.

Introduction: We examined the impact of a geriatric consult program in the emergency department (ED) and an ED observation geriatric care unit (GCU) setting on hospital admission rates for older ED patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective case control study from June 1-August 31, 2019 (pre-program) to September 24, 2019-January 31, 2020 (post-program). Post-program geriatric consults were readily available in the ED and required in the GCU setting. Hospital admission rates (outcome) are reported for patients who received a geriatric consult evaluation (intervention). We analyzed probability of admission using a mixed-effects logistic regression model that included age, gender, recent ED visit, Charlson Comorbidity Index, referral to ED observation, and geriatric consult evaluation as predictor variables. Results: A total of 9,663 geriatric ED encounters occurred, 4,042 pre-program and 5,621 post-program. Overall, ED admission rates for geriatric patients were similar pre- and post-program (44.8% vs 43.9%, P = 0.39). Of 243 geriatric consults, 149 (61.3%) occurred in the GCU. Overall admission rates post-program for patients receiving geriatric intervention were significantly lower compared to pre-program (23.4% vs 44.9%, P < 0.001). Post-program GCU hospital admission rates were significantly lower than pre-program ED observation unit admission rates (14/149, 9.4%, vs 111/477, 23.3%, P < 0.001). In the logistic regression model, admissions post-program were lower when a geriatric consult evaluation occurred (odds ratio [OR] 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.83). Hospital admissions for older ED observation patients were also significantly decreased when a geriatric consult was obtained (GCU vs pre-program ED observation unit; OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.14-0.50). Conclusion: Geriatric consult evaluations were associated with significantly lower rates of hospital admission and persisted when controlled for age, gender, comorbidities, and ED observation unit placement. This model may allow healthcare systems to decrease potentially avoidable hospital admission rates in older ED patients.

Use of the electronic medical record to screen for high-risk geriatric patients in the emergency department.

Older adults with multimorbidities have the highest rate of emergency department (ED) usage. These patients are typically on numerous medications, may have underlying dementia, and often present with falls and delirium. Identifying these high-risk older adults for possible intervention is challenging in the ED setting since available screening methods are manual and resource-intensive. The objective is to study the electronic medical record (EMR) use for identifying high-risk older adults in ED. This feasibility study is conducted in an academic ED with 67 000 total and 24% geriatric (age ≥ 65 years) annual visits, American College of Emergency Physician (ACEP) accredited Level 1 Geriatric Emergency Department with an ED-based geriatric consultation program by incorporating criteria from existing manual geriatric screening instruments and the 4M framework into an automated EMR screen to identify high-risk geriatric patients. ED providers are then alerted by an EMR Best Practice Alert (BPA) if high-risk status is identified. Initial development and impact on geriatric ED consults are reported. During the study period, 7450 patient encounters occurred; 1836 (24.6%) encounters involved patients who were 65 years or older. A total of 1398 (76.1%) high-risk ED encounters resulted in BPA alerts using the EMR automated screen. BPA alerts resulted in 82 (5.9%) geriatric evaluations. We conclude that using the EMR to automate screening for older adults for high-risk geriatric conditions in the ED is feasible. An automated EMR screen with a BPA to ED providers identified a well-defined cohort of older patients appropriate for further ED geriatric evaluation.

Integration of a pharmacist-led pharmacogenomic service in a geriatric clinic: Barriers and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to identify the proportion of patients who successfully completed PGx testing. Secondary objectives included determining the proportion of patients with actionable PGx results, determining the proportion of patients with a baseline medication intervention within 6 months of successfully completing PGx testing, and identifying barriers for not completing testing. DESIGN: This was a single center, non-interventional, retrospective cohort study, approved by the institutional review board. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients included were 65 years of age or older and referred for PGx testing from geriatric outpatient clinics between May 1, 2019 and July 31, 2020. OUTCOME MEASURES: This study aimed to assess the implementation of pharmacist-led pharmacogenomics (PGx) in the care of community-dwelling older adults in an outpatient clinic. Little is known about the acceptance and impact of this type of service within this population. RESULTS: Of the 67 patients included, majority were female (78%), white (76%), and an average age of 78 years ± 5.98 SD. Majority were insured by Original Medicare or Medicaid (61%), had a history of cognitive impairment (84%), had a referring diagnosis of anxiety (40%) or depression (67%), and were prescribed a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (69%) at baseline. Majority successfully completed PGx testing (72%), with 72% having actionable PGx findings and 83% having a pharmacological intervention made thereafter. Nineteen patients did not complete testing (28%), with the primary barrier being not having an appointment scheduled (63%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated majority of older adults were accepting of PGx testing and majority of findings were relevant to clinical care of anxiety, depression, or cognitive impairment.

Assessing cognition in the era of COVID19: Do we need methods to assess cognitive function virtually?

BACKGROUND: With an aging population, cognitive impairment has become increasingly prevalent. Early symptoms are often missed in primary care and may progress to clinical dementia before being noticed. Screening for dementia has been a challenge. No clear guideline describes how to assess for cognition in primary care despite the robust data suggesting that early identification of dementia allows for mobilization of resources to support patients and caregivers, and there is no harm in proactive assessing cognition in older patients. In addition, most of the cognitive assessment methods requires in-person cognitive testing in primary care practices, this may be affected by situations where the in-person visitations to the physician offices are limited such as in the COVID 19 pandemic. Our study aims to access performance of in-person cognitive assessment in primary care during COVID 19 pandemic. METHODS: Cleveland Clinic implanted MiniCog as a cognitive screening tool in primary care at Cleveland Clinic Community Care (4C). Inclusion criteria are- Age 65+, Annual Wellness visit, no preexisting diagnosis of dementia, normal MiniCog in previous year. Data were registered from from January 2019 until November 2020. RESULTS: Figure 1 displays the number of MiniCog performed at 4C averaging 360 MiniCog every month. Total number of MiniCogs performed during the study period was 7126 out of which 6739 were normal (95%) and 387 were abnormal (5%). Figure 2 displays the impact of COVID 19 pandemic on in-person visits in 4C, resulting an impressive decline in cognitive assessment process leading to no cognitive testing in April and only two tests in May. CONCLUSION: Most of the cognitive assessment tools used in clinical practice requires in-person office based and are often needed to diagnose dementia. Telephonic cognitive interviews such as TICS and MoCA 5 minute protocol are available, but are difficult to administer in primary care. The substantial drop in the performance of in-person cognitive assessment during the COVID 19 pandemic raises the need of validated tools to virtually assess cognitive function and also highlights the negative impact of COVID 19 pandemic on already frail processes of assessing cognitive health of older adults in primary care.

COVID-19 in older adults.

The impact of COVID-19 varies by age group, and it has become clear that individuals over 65 years are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 both in terms of severity of illness and mortality. Atypical presentations in older adults may result from pathophysiologic changes during aging and immune dysregulation because of the cumulative impact of chronic comorbidities. Herein we review the different clinical presentations of illness for older adults, the unique challenges faced by this population, and strategies for treatment.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes Based on Decision-Making Capacity.

Background Long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) based on patients' decision-making ability have not been studied. Our objective was to assess long-term outcomes after PCI in patients who provided individual versus surrogate consent. Methods and Results Data were collected retrospectively for patients who underwent PCI at Cleveland Clinic between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016. Inclusion criteria consisted of hospitalized patients aged ≥20 years who had PCI. Patients with outpatient PCI, or major surgery 30 days before or 90 days after PCI, were excluded. Patients who underwent PCI with surrogate consent versus individual consent were matched using the propensity analysis. Kaplan-Meier, log rank, t-statistic, and χ2 tests were used for statistical analysis. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. Of 3136 patients who underwent PCI during the study period, 183 had surrogate consent. Propensity matching yielded 149 patients from each group. Two-year all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the surrogate consent group (38 [25.5%] versus 16 [10.7%] deaths, log-rank χ2=10.16, P<0.001). The 2-year major adverse cardiac events rate was also significantly higher in the surrogate consent group (60 versus 36 events, log-rank χ2=8.36, P=0.003). Conclusions Patients with surrogate consent had significantly higher all-cause mortality and higher major adverse cardiac events when compared with patients with individual consent. This study emphasizes the fact that patients with an inability to give consent are at high risk and may need special attention in postprocedural and postdischarge care.