Challenges of modern medicine - geriatric otolaryngology or the advantages of cooperation between an otolaryngologist and a geriatrician.

Advanced age is often burdened with many deficits that are a consequence of the aging process, unfavorable lifestyle and multi-morbidity. They contribute to increased morbidity and disability of the older people. Laryngological problems often concern seniors, particularly progressing with age hearing impairment, dizziness, balance disorders, epistaxis, nasopharyngeal diseases, larynx, sinuses, and salivary glands disorders. They are not only a health threat, such as head and neck cancer, but they contribute to the deterioration of mobility, falls and injuries, depression, cognitive functions impairment and, consequently, functional disability, loss of independence and a sense of isolation. In this context, taking as an example the most common ailment, which is hearing impairment, laryngological procedures in the form of the use of hearing aids or cochlear implant improves cognitive functions, mood, self-esteem, opportunities for social interaction and everyday functioning, and the quality of life of older people. In turn, in view of the typical for older age polypathology and of significant reduction of the reserves of the organism, effective treatment aimed at improving health, preventing complications of diagnostics and therapy as well as disability with the desire to maintain independence and good quality of life requires the cooperation of different specialists. The knowledge and experience of geriatricians and the comprehensive geriatric assessment used as the diagnostic tool, aimed at identifying deficits typical of seniors' age may significantly contribute to a more adequate risk and benefit assessment, selection of optimal treatment for a given health situation and identification of high-risk individuals requiring during the treatment period special supervision to reduce the risk of complications and the risk of development of geriatric syndromes such as delirium, cognitive disorders, malnutrition, falls and injuries, functional disability.

Prescribing in the oldest old inpatients: a retrospective analysis of patients referred for specialist geriatric consultation.

BACKGROUND: While medications may prolong life and prevent morbidity in older people, adverse effects of polypharmacy are increasingly recognised. As patients age and become frail, prescribing may be expected to focus more on symptom control and minimise potentially harmful preventive medication use that confer little benefit within a short lifespan. Whether prescribing practice shifts to one of symptom controls among the oldest old admitted to hospital remains unclear. AIM: To determine, in the oldest old inpatients, whether preventive versus symptom control medication prescribing was associated with age or level of frailty. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all patients aged ≥85 years referred for comprehensive geriatric assessment at a tertiary care hospital between May 2006 and December 2014 for whom all prescribed medications were documented. Medication use was assessed according to age group (85-89, 90-94, ≥95) and categories of frailty index calculated for patients based on 52 deficits (fitter, moderately frail, frail and severely frail). RESULTS: Seven hundred and eighty-three inpatients were assessed of mean (SD) age 89.0 (3.4) and mean frailty index 0.45 (SD 0.14) with a median of eight co-morbidities (IQR 6-10) and who were prescribed a mean of 8.3 (SD 3.8) regular medications per day. Polypharmacy (5-9 medications per day) was observed in 406 patients (51.9%) and hyper-polypharmacy (≥10 medications per day) in 268 patients (34.2%). While there was a significant decrease in number of prescribed medications as age increased, there were no differences across age groups or frailty categories in proportions of medications used for prevention versus symptom control. CONCLUSION: Polypharmacy is prevalent in oldest old inpatients and prescribing patterns according to prevention versus symptom control appear unaffected by age and frailty status.

Technology-induced errors associated with computerized provider order entry software for older patients.

Background The introduction of new technologies in the prescribing process has seen the emergence of new types of medication errors. Objective To determine the prevalence and consequences of technology-induced prescription errors associated with a computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system in hospitalized older patients. Setting Patients 65 years or older admitted to the Departments of Internal Medicine, General Surgery, and Vascular Surgery of a tertiary hospital. Method Prospective observational 6-month study. Technology-induced errors were classified according to various taxonomies. Interrater reliability was measured. Consequences were assessed by interviewing patients and healthcare providers and classified according to their severity. Main outcome measure Prevalence of technology-induced errors. Results A total of 117 patients were included and 107 technology-induced errors were recorded. The prevalence of these errors was 3.65%. Half of the errors were clinical errors (n = 54) and the majority of these were classified as wrong dose, wrong strength, or wrong formulation. Clinical errors were 9 times more likely to be more severe than procedural errors (14.8 vs 1.9%; OR 9.04, 95% CI 1.09-75.07). Most of the errors did not reach the patient. Almost all errors were related to human-machine interactions due to wrong (n = 61) or partial (n = 41) entries. Conclusion Technology-induced errors are common and intrinsic to the implementation of new technologies such as CPOE. The majority of errors appear to be related to human-machine interactions and are of low severity. Prospective trials should be conducted to analyse in detail the way these errors occur and to establish strategies to solve them and increase patient safety.

Increased orthogeriatrician involvement in hip fracture care and its impact on mortality in England.

Objectives: to describe the increase in orthogeriatrician involvement in hip fracture care in England and its association with improvements in time to surgery and mortality. Study design: analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics for 196,401 patients presenting with hip fracture to 150 hospitals in England between 1 April 2010 and 28 February 2014, combined with data on orthogeriatrician hours from a national organisational survey. Methods: we examined changes in the average number of hours worked by orthogeriatricians in orthopaedic departments per patient with hip fracture, and their potential effect on mortality within 30 days of presentation. The role of prompt surgery (on day of or day after presentation) was explored as a potential confounding factor. Associations were assessed using conditional Poisson regression models with adjustment for patients' sex, age and comorbidity and year, with hospitals treated as fixed effects. Results: between 2010 and 2013, there was an increase of 2.5 hours per patient in the median number of hours worked by orthogeriatricians-from 1.5 to 4.0 hours. An increase of 2.5 hours per patient was associated with a relative reduction in mortality of 3.4% (95% confidence interval 0.9% to 5.9%, P = 0.01). This corresponds to an absolute reduction of approximately 0.3%. Higher numbers of orthogeriatrician hours were associated with higher rates of prompt surgery, but were independently associated with lower mortality. Conclusion: in the context of initiatives to improve hip fracture care, we identified statistically significant and robust associations between increased orthogeriatrician hours per patient and reduced 30-day mortality.