Assessment tools addressing avoidable care transitions in older adults: a systematic literature review.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Rustem Makhmutov, Alicia Calle Egusquiza, Cristina Roqueta Guillen, Eva-Maria Amor Fernandez, Gabriele Meyer, Moriah E Ellen, Steffen Fleischer, Anna Renom Guiteras
{"title":"Assessment tools addressing avoidable care transitions in older adults: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Rustem Makhmutov, Alicia Calle Egusquiza, Cristina Roqueta Guillen, Eva-Maria Amor Fernandez, Gabriele Meyer, Moriah E Ellen, Steffen Fleischer, Anna Renom Guiteras","doi":"10.1007/s41999-024-01106-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The phenomenon of avoidable care transitions has received increasing attention over the last decades due to its frequency and associated burden for the patients and the healthcare system. A number of assessment tools to identify avoidable transitions have been designed and implemented. The selection of the most appropriate tool appears to be challenging and time-consuming. This systematic review aimed to identify and comprehensively describe the assessment tools that can support stakeholders´ care transition decisions on older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was conducted as part of the TRANS-SENIOR research network. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL. No restrictions regarding publication date and language were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search in three electronic databases revealed 1266 references and screening for eligibility resulted in 58 articles for inclusion. A total of 48 assessment tools were identified covering different concepts, judgement processes, and transition destinations. We found variation in the comprehensiveness of the tools with regard to dimensions used in the judgement process.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All tools are not comprehensive with respect to the dimensions covered, as they address only one or a few perspectives. Although assessment tools can be useful in clinical practice, it is worth it to bear in mind that they are meant to support decision-making and supplement the care professional´s judgement, instead of replacing it. Our review might guide clinicians and researchers in choosing the right tool for identification of avoidable care transitions, and thus support informed decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":49287,"journal":{"name":"European Geriatric Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Geriatric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-024-01106-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The phenomenon of avoidable care transitions has received increasing attention over the last decades due to its frequency and associated burden for the patients and the healthcare system. A number of assessment tools to identify avoidable transitions have been designed and implemented. The selection of the most appropriate tool appears to be challenging and time-consuming. This systematic review aimed to identify and comprehensively describe the assessment tools that can support stakeholders´ care transition decisions on older adults.

Methods: This study was conducted as part of the TRANS-SENIOR research network. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, and CENTRAL. No restrictions regarding publication date and language were applied.

Results: The search in three electronic databases revealed 1266 references and screening for eligibility resulted in 58 articles for inclusion. A total of 48 assessment tools were identified covering different concepts, judgement processes, and transition destinations. We found variation in the comprehensiveness of the tools with regard to dimensions used in the judgement process.

Conclusion: All tools are not comprehensive with respect to the dimensions covered, as they address only one or a few perspectives. Although assessment tools can be useful in clinical practice, it is worth it to bear in mind that they are meant to support decision-making and supplement the care professional´s judgement, instead of replacing it. Our review might guide clinicians and researchers in choosing the right tool for identification of avoidable care transitions, and thus support informed decision-making.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Geriatric Medicine
European Geriatric Medicine GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Geriatric Medicine is the official journal of the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS). Launched in 2010, this journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of Geriatric Medicine. The EUGMS is interested in the promotion of Geriatric Medicine in any setting (acute or subacute care, rehabilitation, nursing homes, primary care, fall clinics, ambulatory assessment, dementia clinics..), and also in functionality in old age, comprehensive geriatric assessment, geriatric syndromes, geriatric education, old age psychiatry, models of geriatric care in health services, and quality assurance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信