Examining the effect of interventions in emergency care for older people using a system dynamics decision support tool.

BACKGROUND: Rising demand for Emergency and Urgent Care is a major international issue and outcomes for older people remain sub-optimal. Embarking upon large-scale service development is costly in terms of time, energy and resources with no guarantee of improved outcomes; computer simulation modelling offers an alternative, low risk and lower cost approach to explore possible interventions. METHOD: A system dynamics computer simulation model was developed as a decision support tool for service planners. The model represents patient flow through the emergency care process from the point of calling for help through ED attendance, possible admission, and discharge or death. The model was validated against five different evidence-based interventions (geriatric emergency medicine, front door frailty, hospital at home, proactive care and acute frailty units) on patient outcomes such as hospital-related mortality, readmission and length of stay. RESULTS: The model output estimations are consistent with empirical evidence. Each intervention has different levels of effect on patient outcomes. Most of the interventions show potential reductions in hospital admissions, readmissions and hospital-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: System dynamics modelling can be used to support decisions on which emergency care interventions to implement to improve outcomes for older people.

New horizons in the role of digital data in the healthcare of older people.

There are national and global moves to improve effective digital data design and application in healthcare. This New Horizons commentary describes the role of digital data in healthcare of the ageing population. We outline how health and social care professionals can engage in the proactive design of digital systems that appropriately serve people as they age, carers and the workforce that supports them. KEY POINTS: Healthcare improvements have resulted in increased population longevity and hence multimorbidity. Shared care records to improve communication and information continuity across care settings hold potential for older people. Data structure and coding are key considerations. A workforce with expertise in caring for older people with relevant knowledge and skills in digital healthcare is important.

Factors associated with longer wait times, admission and reattendances in older patients attending emergency departments: an analysis of linked healthcare data.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Care for older patients in the ED is an increasingly important issue with the ageing society. To better assess the quality of care in this patient group, we assessed predictors for three outcomes related to ED care: being seen and discharged within 4 hours of ED arrival; being admitted from ED to hospital and reattending the ED within 30 days. We also used these outcomes to identify better-performing EDs. METHODS: The CUREd Research Database was used for a retrospective observational study of all 1 039 251 attendances by 368 754 patients aged 75+ years in 18 type 1 EDs in the Yorkshire and the Humber region of England between April 2012 and March 2017. We estimated multilevel logit models, accounting for patients' characteristics and contact with emergency services prior to ED arrival, time variables and the ED itself. RESULTS: Patients in the oldest category (95+ years vs 75-80 years) were more likely to have a long ED wait (OR=1.13 (95% CI=1.10 to 1.15)), hospital admission (OR=1.26 (95% CI=1.23 to 1.29)) and ED reattendance (OR=1.09 (95% CI=1.06 to 1.12)). Those who had previously attended (3+ vs 0 previous attendances) were more likely to have long wait (OR=1.07 (95% CI=1.06 to 1.08)), hospital admission (OR=1.10 (95% CI=1.09 to 1.12)) and ED attendance (OR=3.13 (95% CI=3.09 to 3.17)). Those who attended out of hours (vs not out of hours) were more likely to have a long ED wait (OR=1.33 (95% CI=1.32 to 1.34)), be admitted to hospital (OR=1.19 (95% CI=1.18 to 1.21)) and have ED reattendance (OR=1.07 (95% CI=1.05 to 1.08)). Those living in less deprived decile (vs most deprived decile) were less likely to have any of these three outcomes: OR=0.93 (95% CI=0.92 to 0.95), 0.92 (95% CI=0.90 to 0.94), 0.86 (95% CI=0.84 to 0.88). These characteristics were not strongly associated with long waits for those who arrived by ambulance. Emergency call handler designation was the strongest predictor of long ED waits and hospital admission: compared with those who did not arrive by ambulance; ORs for these outcomes were 1.18 (95% CI=1.16 to 1.20) and 1.85 (95% CI=1.81 to 1.89) for those designated less urgent; 1.37 (95% CI=1.33 to 1.40) and 2.13 (95% CI=2.07 to 2.18) for urgent attendees; 1.26 (95% CI=1.23 to 1.28) and 2.40 (95% CI=2.36 to 2.45) for emergency attendees; and 1.37 (95% CI=1.28 to 1.45) and 2.42 (95% CI=2.26 to 2.59) for those with life-threatening conditions. We identified two EDs whose patients were less likely to have a long ED, hospital admission or ED reattendance than other EDs in the region. CONCLUSIONS: Age, previous attendance and attending out of hours were all associated with an increased likelihood of exceeding 4 hours in the ED, hospital admission and reattendance among patients over 75 years. These differences were less pronounced among those arriving by ambulance. Emergency call handler designation could be used to identify those at the highest risk of long ED waits, hospital admission and ED reattendance.

Measuring health-related quality of life of older people with frailty receiving acute care: feasibility and psychometric performance of the EuroQol EQ-5D.

BACKGROUND: Although outcome goals for acute healthcare among older people living with frailty often include Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and other patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), current quality metrics usually focus on waiting times and survival. Lay and patient review have identified the EuroQol EQ-5D as a candidate measure for this setting. This research appraised the EQ-5D for feasibility, psychometric performance, and respondents' outcomes in the acute frailty setting. METHODS: People aged 65 + with Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) 5-8 were recruited from eight UK hospitals' emergency care and acute admissions settings. They completed the five-level EQ-5D and the EQ-VAS. Feasibility was assessed with completion times and completeness. For reliability, response distributions and internal consistency were analysed. Finally, EQ-Index values were compared with demographic characteristics and service outcomes for construct validity. RESULTS: The 232 participants were aged 65-102. 38% responded in emergency departments and 62% in admissions wards. Median completion time was 12 (IQR, 11) minutes. 98% responses were complete. EQ-5D had acceptable response distribution (SD 1.1-1.3) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.69). EQ-VAS demonstrated a midpoint response pattern. Median EQ-Index was 0.574 (IQR, 0.410) and was related positively with increasing age (p = 0.010) and negatively with CFS (p < 0.001). Participants with higher CFS had more frequent problems with mobility, self-care, and usual activities. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of the EQ-5D was feasible in these emergency and acute frailty care settings. EQ-5D had acceptable properties, while EQ-VAS appeared problematic. Participants with more severe frailty had also poorer HRQoL.

What matters most in acute care: an interview study with older people living with frailty.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare outcome goals are central to person-centred acute care, however evidence among older people is scarce. Older people who are living with frailty have distinct requirements for healthcare delivery and have distinct risk for adverse outcomes from healthcare. There is insufficient evidence for whether those living with frailty also have distinct healthcare outcome goals. This study explored the nature of acute care outcome goals in people living with frailty. METHODS: Healthcare outcome goals were explored using semi-structured patient interviews. Participants aged over 65 with Clinical Frailty Score 5-8 (mild to very severe frailty) were recruited during their first 72 hours in a UK hospital. Purposive, maximum variation sampling was guided by lay partners from a Patient and Public Involvement Forum specialising in ageing-related research. Qualitative analysis used a blended approach based on framework and constant comparative methodologies for the identification of themes. Findings were validated through triangulation with participant, lay partner, and technical expert review. RESULTS: The 22 participants were aged 71 to 98 and had mild to very severe frailty. One quarter were living with dementia. Most participants had reflected on their situation and considered their outcome goals. Theme categories (and corresponding sub-categories) were 'Autonomy' (information, control, and security) and 'Functioning' (physical, psychosocial, and relief). A novel 'security' theme was identified, whereby participants sought to feel safe in their usual living place and with their health problems. Those living with milder frailty were concerned to maintain ability to support loved ones, while those living with most severe frailty were concerned about burdening others. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome goals for acute care among older participants living with frailty were influenced by the insecurity of their situation and fear of deterioration. Patients may be supported to feel safe and in control through appropriate information provision and functional support.

Does the Clinical Frailty Scale at Triage Predict Outcomes From Emergency Care for Older People?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We determine whether the Clinical Frailty Scale applied at emergency department (ED) triage is associated with important service- and patient-related outcomes. METHODS: We undertook a single-center, retrospective cohort study examining hospital-related outcomes and their associations with frailty scores assessed at ED triage. Participants were aged 65 years or older, registered on their first ED presentation during the study period at a single, centralized ED in the United Kingdom. Baseline data included age, sex, Clinical Frailty Scale score, National Early Warning Score-2 and the Charlson Comorbidity Index score; outcomes included length of stay, readmissions (any future admissions), and mortality (inhospital or out of hospital) up to 2 years after ED presentation. Survival analysis methods (standard and competing risks) were applied to assess associations between ED triage frailty scores and outcomes. Unadjusted incidence curves and adjusted hazard ratios are presented. RESULTS: A total of 52,562 individuals representing 138,328 ED attendances were included; participants' mean age was 78.0 years, and 55% were women. Initial admission rates generally increased with frailty. Mean length of stay after 30- or 180-day follow-up was relatively low; all Clinical Frailty Scale categories included patients who experienced zero days' length of stay (ie, ambulatory care) and patients with relatively high numbers of inhospital days. Overall, 46% of study participants were readmitted by the 2-year follow-up. Readmissions increased with Clinical Frailty Scale score up until a score of 6 and then attenuated. Mortality rates increased with increasing frailty; the adjusted hazard ratio was 3.6 for Clinical Frailty Scale score 7 to 8 compared with score 1 to 3. CONCLUSION: Frailty assessed at ED triage (with the Clinical Frailty Scale) is associated with adverse outcomes in older people. Its use in ED triage might aid immediate clinical decisionmaking and service configuration.

What is the relationship between validated frailty scores and mortality for adults with COVID-19 in acute hospital care? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to quantify the association between frailty and COVID-19 in relation to mortality in hospitalised patients. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the grey literature were searched for papers from inception to 10 September 2020; the search was re-run in Medline up until the 9 December 2020. Screening, data extraction and quality grading were undertaken by two reviewers. Results were summarised using descriptive statistics, including a meta-analysis of overall mortality; the relationships between frailty and COVID-19 mortality were summarised narratively. RESULTS: A total of 2,286 papers were screened resulting in 26 being included in the review. Most studies were from Europe, half from the UK, and one from Brazil; the median sample size was 242.5, median age 73.1 and 43.5% were female. In total, 22/26 used the Clinical Frailty Scale; reported mortality ranged from 14 to 65%. Most, but not all studies showed an association between increasing frailty and a greater risk of dying. Two studies indicated a sub-additive relationship between frailty, COVID-19 and death, and two studies showed no association. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the majority of studies have shown a positive association between COVID-19-related death and increasing frailty, some studies suggested a more nuanced understanding of frailty and outcomes in COVID-19 is needed. Clinicians should exert caution in placing too much emphasis on the influence of frailty alone when discussing likely prognosis in older people with COVID-19 illness.

Improving outcomes for older people in the emergency department: a review of reviews.

BACKGROUND: There has been a recognised trend of increasing use of emergency and urgent care and emergency departments (EDs) by older people, which is marked by a substantial evidence base reporting interventions for this population and guidance from key organisations. Despite this, outcomes for this population remain suboptimal. A plethora of reviews in this area provides challenges for clinicians and commissioners in determining which interventions and models of care best meet people's needs. The aim of this review was to identify effective ED interventions which have been reported for older people, and to provide a clear summary of the myriad reviews and numerous intervention types in this area. METHODS: A review of reviews, reporting interventions for older people, either initiated or wholly delivered within the ED. RESULTS: A total of 15 review articles describing 83 primary studies met our content and reporting standards criteria. The majority (n=13) were systematic reviews (four using meta-analysis.) Across the reviews, 26 different outcomes were reported with inconsistency. Follow-up duration varied within and across the reviews. Based on how authors had reported results, evidence clusters were developed: (1) staff-focused reviews, (2) discharge intervention reviews, (3) population-focused reviews and (4) intervention component reviews. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base describing interventions is weak due to inconsistent reporting, differing emphasis placed on the key characteristics of primary studies (staff, location and outcome) by review authors and varying quality of reviews. No individual interventions have been found to be more promising, but interventions initiated in the ED and continued into other settings have tended to result in more favourable patient and health service outcomes. Despite many interventions reported within the reviews being holistic and patient focused, outcomes measured were largely service focused. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42018111461.

Emergency department management of older people living with frailty: a guide for emergency practitioners.

Emergency Departments (EDs) are increasingly seeing more seriously unwell older people living with frailty. In the context of limited resources and increasing demand it's the ED practitioner's challenge to unpick this constellation of physical, psychological, functional and social issues.To properly assess older people living with frailty at the ED it is crucial to use an holistic approach. This consists of triage with algorithms sensitive to the higher risk of older people living with frailty, a frailty assessment, and an assessment with the help of the principles of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. Multi-disciplinary care, a tailor-made treatment plan, based on what the person values most, will help the ED practitioner to deliver appropriate and valuable care during the ED stay, but also in transition from hospital to home.

Patient-reported outcome and experience measures in geriatric emergency medicine.

Older people with frailty and health crises have complex physical and social needs. Modern emergency care systems are fast-flowing, using protocols optimised for single-problem presentations. Systems must incorporate individualised care to best serve people with multiple problems. Healthcare quality is typically appraised with service metrics, such as department length of stay and mortality. Worldwide, patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and patient-reported experience measures (PREM) are increasingly used in research, service development and performance evaluation, paving the ground for their use to support individual clinical decision-making. The PROMs and PREMs are person-centred metrics, which inform healthcare decisions at the individual level and which at the strategic level drive improvement through comparison of interprovider effectiveness. To date, there is no PROM or PREM specifically developed for older people with frailty and emergency care needs.

What older people want from emergency care: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the expectations and preferred outcomes from emergency care among older people or their caregivers. METHODS: A review protocol was registered. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, BNI, AgeInfo and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched in their full date ranges to September 2018. Included articles were hand-searched for further citations. Citations were screened for (1) older people aged over 65 years, (2) ED settings and (3) reporting expectations or preferred outcomes for emergency care (as opposed to experience or satisfaction). Quality appraisal and data extraction of eligible articles were undertaken by two reviewers. Themes were synthesised through content analysis and described narratively. RESULTS: Older people wished to have prompt waiting times, efficient care, clear communication and comfortable environments. They had additional and unique expectations for holistic care and support in decision-making. The ED provoked a sense of vulnerability among older people who were likely to have had frailty. CONCLUSION: The lack of dominant themes among included studies suggests that older people should be treated as individuals rather than a homogenous group. Establishing individuals' preferred outcomes could improve person-centred care. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018107050.

Patient-reported outcome measure use among older adults after emergency department care: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are gaining favor in clinical and research settings given their ability to capture a patient's symptom burden, functional status, and quality of life. Our objective in this systematic review was to summarize studies including PROMs assessed among older adults (age ≥ 65 years) after seeking emergency care. METHODS: With the assistance of a medical librarian, we searched Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science-Core Collection, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception through June 2023 for studies in which older adult ED patients had PROMs assessed in the post-emergency care time period. Independent reviewers performed title/abstract review, full-text screening, data extraction, study characteristic summarization, and risk-of-bias (RoB) assessments. RESULTS: Our search strategy yielded 5153 studies of which 56 met study inclusion criteria. Within included studies, 304 unique PROM assessments were performed at varying time points after the ED visit, including 61 unique PROMs. The most commonly measured domain was physical function, assessed within the majority of studies (47/56; 84%), with measures including PROMs such as Katz activities of daily living (ADLs), instrumental ADLs, and the Barthel Index. PROMs were most frequently assessed at 1-3 months after an ED visit (113/304; 37%), greater than 6 months (91/304; 30%), and 4-6 months (88/304; 29%), with very few PROMs assessed within 1 month of the ED visit (12/304; 4%). Of the 16 interventional studies, two were determined to have a low RoB, four had moderate RoB, nine had high RoB, and one had insufficient information. Of the 40 observational studies, 10 were determined to be of good quality, 20 of moderate quality, and 10 of poor quality. CONCLUSIONS: PROM assessments among older adults following an ED visit frequently measured physical function, with very few assessments occurring within the first 1 month after an ED visit.

Improving outcomes for older people with emergency care needs.

This article describes work on emergency care for older people. It summarises patient experience in emergency care settings, the evidence base relating to improvement of outcomes and emerging interventions and describes tools that can support teams as they work on service improvement. Finally, it calls for the measurement of outcomes that matter to older people, as a mechanism to drive more person-centred approaches to emergency care.

Are we measuring what matters to older people?

Comprehensive geriatric assessment is the core toolkit of geriatric medicine. Awareness of and engagement in comprehensive geriatric assessment are crucial competences for all professionals caring for older people living with frailty. The fundamental tenet of comprehensive geriatric assessment is person centredness, which means orienting problem evaluation and intervention plans around an individual's specific biopsychosocial situation to maximise their function and participation. Person-centred outcomes are frequently neglected from measurements of health-care delivery, service improvement, and research. Instead, systems tend to measure outcomes of the health-care service (ie, resource use) or a person's destination following a health-care process. The absence of person-centred outcome measures risks the delivery of health care that seeks to achieve, and is benchmarked against, outcomes that are not best for the patient. We must, therefore, ensure that the outcomes that matter to older people are being measured.