Unravelling complex primary-care programs to maintain independent living in older people: a systematic overview.

OBJECTIVES: Complex interventions are criticized for being a "black box", which makes it difficult to determine why they succeed or fail. Recently, nine proactive primary-care programs aiming to prevent functional decline in older adults showed inconclusive effects. The aim of this study was to systematically unravel, compare, and synthesize the development and evaluation of nine primary-care programs within a controlled trial to further improve the development and evaluation of complex interventions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic overview of all written data on the nine proactive primary-care programs was conducted using a validated item list. The nine proactive primary-care programs involved 214 general practices throughout the Netherlands. RESULTS: There was little or no focus on the (1) context surrounding the care program, (2) modeling of processes and outcomes, (3) intervention fidelity and adaptation, and (4) content and evaluation of training for interventionists. CONCLUSIONS: An in-depth analysis of the context, modeling of the processes and outcomes, measurement and reporting of intervention fidelity, and implementation of effective training for interventionists is needed to enhance the development and replication of future complex interventions.

Cost-effectiveness of nurse-led multifactorial care to prevent or postpone new disabilities in community-living older people: Results of a cluster randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nurse-led multifactorial care to prevent or postpone new disabilities in community-living older people in comparison with usual care. METHODS: We conducted cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses alongside a cluster randomized trial with one-year follow-up. Participants were aged ≥ 70 years and at increased risk of functional decline. Participants in the intervention group (n = 1209) received a comprehensive geriatric assessment and individually tailored multifactorial interventions coordinated by a community-care registered nurse with multiple follow-up visits. The control group (n = 1074) received usual care. Costs were assessed from a healthcare perspective. Outcome measures included disability (modified Katz-Activities of Daily Living (ADL) index score), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated using bootstrapped bivariate regression models while adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in Katz-ADL index score and QALYs between the two groups. Total mean costs were significantly higher in the intervention group (EUR 6518 (SE 472) compared with usual care (EUR 5214 (SE 338); adjusted mean difference €1457 (95% CI: 572; 2537). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.14 at a willingness to pay (WTP) of EUR 50,000 per one point improvement on the Katz-ADL index score and 0.04 at a WTP of EUR 50,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: The current intervention was not cost-effective compared to usual care to prevent or postpone new disabilities over a one-year period. Based on these findings, implementation of the evaluated multifactorial nurse-led care model is not to be recommended.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment: recognition of identified geriatric conditions by community-dwelling older persons.

OBJECTIVES: to study (i) the prevalence of geriatric conditions in community-dwelling older persons at increased risk of functional decline and (ii) the extent to which older persons recognise comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA)-identified conditions as relevant problems. METHODS: trained registered nurses conducted a CGA in 934 out of 1209 older persons at increased risk of functional decline participating in the intervention arm of a randomised trial in the Netherlands. After screening for 32 geriatric conditions, participants were asked which of the identified geriatric conditions they recognised as relevant problems. RESULTS: at baseline, the median age of participants was 82.9 years (interquartile range (IQR) 77.3-87.3 years). The median number of identified geriatric conditions per participant was 8 (IQR 6-11). The median number of geriatric conditions that were recognised was 1 (IQR 0-2). Functional dependency and (increased risk of) alcohol and drug dependency were the most commonly identified conditions. Pain was the most widely recognised problem. CONCLUSION: CGA identified many geriatric conditions, of which few were recognised as a problem by the person involved. Further study is needed to better understand how older persons interact with identified geriatric conditions, in terms of perceived relevance. This may yield a more efficient CGA and further improve a patient-centred approach.

Effects of Nurse-Led Multifactorial Care to Prevent Disability in Community-Living Older People: Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effects of nurse-led multifactorial care to prevent disability in community-living older people. METHODS: In a cluster randomized trail, 11 practices (n = 1,209 participants) were randomized to the intervention group, and 13 practices (n = 1,074 participants) were randomized to the control group. Participants aged ≥ 70 years were at increased risk of functional decline based on a score ≥ 2 points on the Identification of Seniors at Risk- Primary Care, ISAR-PC. Participants in the intervention group received a systematic comprehensive geriatric assessment, and individually tailored multifactorial interventions coordinated by a trained community-care registered nurse (CCRN) with multiple follow-up home visits. The primary outcome was the participant's disability as measured by the modified Katz activities of daily living (ADL) index score (range 0-15) at one year follow-up. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, hospitalization, and mortality. RESULTS: At baseline, the median age was 82.7 years (IQR 77.0-87.1), the median modified Katz-ADL index score was 2 (IQR 1-5) points in the intervention group and 3 (IQR 1-5) points in the control group. The follow-up rate was 76.8% (n = 1753) after one year and was similar in both trial groups. The adjusted intervention effect on disability was -0.07 (95% confidence interval -0.22 to 0.07; p = 0.33). No intervention effects were found for the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that a one-year individualized multifactorial intervention program with nurse-led care coordination was better than the current primary care in community-living older people at increased risk of functional decline in The Netherlands. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2653.

Changes in the in-hospital mortality and 30-day post-discharge mortality in acutely admitted older patients: retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: to compare changes over time in the in-hospital mortality and the mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge for six highly prevalent discharge diagnoses in acutely admitted older patients as well as to assess the effect of separately analysing the in-hospital mortality and the mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: retrospective analysis of Dutch hospital and mortality data collected between 2000 and 2010. SUBJECTS: the participants included 263,746 people, aged 65 years and above, who were acutely admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia or hip fracture. METHODS: we compared changes in the in-hospital mortality and mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge in the Netherlands using a logistic- and a multinomial regression model. RESULTS: for all six diagnoses, the mortality from admission to 30 days post-discharge declined between 2000 and 2009. The decline ranged from a relative risk ratio (RRR) of 0.41 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38-0.45] for AMI to 0.77 [0.73-0.82] for HF. In separate analyses, the in-hospital mortality decreased for all six diagnoses. The mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge in 2009 compared to 2000 depended on the diagnosis, and either declined, remained unchanged or increased. CONCLUSIONS: the decline in hospital mortality in acutely admitted older patients was largely attributable to the lower in-hospital mortality, while the change in the mortality from discharge to 30 days post-discharge depended on the diagnosis. Separately reporting the two rate estimates might be more informative than providing an overall hospital mortality rate.

[Identification of seniors at risk--primary care: a validated questionnaire predicting functional decline]. / Een gevalideerd screeningsinstrument voorspelt functieverlies bij thuiswonende ouderen: de Identification of Seniors at Risk--Primary Care (ISAR-PC).

OBJECTIVES: To modify and validate in primary healthcare the Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR) screening questionnaire to identify older persons at increased risk of functional decline and to compare this strategy with risk stratification by age alone. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective development (n=790) and validation cohorts (n=2,573) of community-dwelling persons aged ≥70 years. Functional decline at 12 months was defined as an increase of at least one point on the modified Katz-activities of daily living index score compared with baseline or death. RESULTS: Three items were independently associated with functional decline: age (odds ratio [OR] 1.06 per year; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02, 1.10) dependence in instrumental activities of daily living (OR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.46, 3.22), and impaired memory (OR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.41, 3.51). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) range of the ISAR-primary care model was 0.67-0.70 and 40.6% was identified at increased risk. Validation yielded an AUC range of 0.63-0.64. Age≥75 years alone yielded an AUC range of 0.56-0.57 and identified 65.0% at increased risk in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: Although the ISAR-Primary Care (ISAR-PC) has moderate predictive value, application of the ISAR-PC is more efficient than selection based on age alone in identifying persons at increased risk of functional decline. This paper is a translated and adjusted version based on a publication in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67 (2014) 1121-1130.

A simple validated questionnaire predicted functional decline in community-dwelling older persons: prospective cohort studies.

OBJECTIVES: To modify and validate in primary health care the Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR) screening questionnaire to identify older persons at increased risk of functional decline and to compare this strategy with risk stratification by age alone. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective development (n = 790) and validation cohorts (n = 2,573) of community-dwelling persons aged ≥70 years. Functional decline at 12 months was defined as an increase of at least one point on the modified Katz-activities of daily living index score compared with baseline or death. RESULTS: Three items were independently associated with functional decline: age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.06 per year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02, 1.10), dependence in instrumental activities of daily living (OR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.46, 3.22), and impaired memory (OR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.41, 3.51). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) range of the ISAR-primary care model was 0.67-0.70, and 40.6% was identified at increased risk. Validation yielded an AUC range of 0.63-0.64. Age ≥75 years alone yielded an AUC range of 0.56-0.57 and identified 55.4% at increased risk in the development cohort. CONCLUSION: Although the ISAR-Primary Care (ISAR-PC) has moderate predictive value, application of the ISAR-PC is more efficient than selection based on age alone in identifying persons at increased risk of functional decline.

Self-report of healthcare utilization among community-dwelling older persons: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported data are often used for estimates on healthcare utilization in cost-effectiveness studies. OBJECTIVE: To analyze older adults' self-report of healthcare utilization compared to data obtained from the general practitioners' (GP) electronic medical record (EMR) and to study the differences in healthcare utilization between those who completed the study, those who did not respond, and those lost to follow-up. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted among community-dwelling persons aged 70 years and above, without dementia and not living in a nursing home. Self-reporting questionnaires were compared to healthcare utilization data extracted from the EMR at the GP-office. RESULTS: Overall, 790 persons completed questionnaires at baseline, median age 75 years (IQR 72-80), 55.8% had no disabilities in (instrumental) activities of daily living. Correlations between self-report data and EMR data on healthcare utilization were substantial for 'hospitalizations' and 'GP home visits' at 12 months intraclass correlation coefficient 0.63 (95% CI; 0.58-0.68). Compared to the EMR, self-reported healthcare utilization was generally slightly over-reported. Non-respondents received more GP home visits (p<0.05). Of the participants who died or were institutionalized 62.2% received 2 or more home visits (p<0.001) and 18.9% had 2 or more hospital admissions (p<0.001) versus respectively 18.6% and 3.9% of the participants who completed the study. Of the participants lost to follow-up for other reasons 33.0% received 2 or more home visits (p<0.01) versus 18.6 of the participants who completed the study. CONCLUSIONS: Self-report of hospitalizations and GP home visits in a broadly 'healthy' community-dwelling older population seems adequate and efficient. However, as people become older and more functionally impaired, collecting healthcare utilization data from the EMR should be considered to avoid measurement bias, particularly if the data will be used to support economic evaluation.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment, multifactorial interventions and nurse-led care coordination to prevent functional decline in community-dwelling older persons: protocol of a cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Functional decline in community-dwelling older persons is associated with the loss of independence, the need for hospital and nursing-home care and premature death. The effectiveness of multifactorial interventions in preventing functional decline remains controversial. The aim of this study is to investigate whether functional decline in community-dwelling older persons can be delayed or prevented by a comprehensive geriatric assessment, multifactorial interventions and nurse-led care coordination. METHODS/DESIGN: In a cluster randomized controlled trial, with the general practice as the unit of randomization, 1281 participants from 25 general practices will be enrolled in each condition to compare the intervention with usual care. The intervention will focus on older persons who are at increased risk for functional decline, identified by an Identification of Seniors at Risk Primary Care (ISAR-PC) score (≥ 2). These older persons will receive a comprehensive geriatric assessment, an individually tailored care and treatment plan, consisting of multifactorial, evidence-based interventions and subsequent nurse-led care coordination. The control group will receive 'care as usual' by the general practitioner (GP). The main outcome after 12 months is the level of physical functioning on the modified Katz-15 index score. The secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life, psychological and social functioning, healthcare utilization and institutionalization. Furthermore, a process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: This study will provide new knowledge regarding the effectiveness and feasibility of a comprehensive geriatric assessment, multifactorial interventions and nurse-led elderly care in general practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2653 GRANT: Unrestricted grant 'The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and development' no 313020201.