Routine comprehensive geriatric assessment is associated with improved detection of cognitive disorders in older people with giant cell arteritis

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Heather Jones, Maxine Isbel, Kristie Harper, Angela Jacques, Alexander Chua, David Ng, Sarah Bernard
{"title":"Routine comprehensive geriatric assessment is associated with improved detection of cognitive disorders in older people with giant cell arteritis","authors":"Heather Jones,&nbsp;Maxine Isbel,&nbsp;Kristie Harper,&nbsp;Angela Jacques,&nbsp;Alexander Chua,&nbsp;David Ng,&nbsp;Sarah Bernard","doi":"10.1111/ajag.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Giant cell arteritis (GCA) carries an increased risk of stroke and blindness. International guidelines recommend older people receive routine comprehensive geriatric assessment (RCGA) during unplanned hospital admissions to improve health outcomes. This quality improvement study addressed the need for RCGA in older people with GCA at an Australian tertiary hospital. The aims of this study were to co-design, implement and evaluate a referral process for RCGA for hospitalised people 65 years or older with a new diagnosis of GCA and evaluate changes to the identification and management of falls and cognitive disorders (delirium, dementia and mild cognitive impairment).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Hospital stakeholders co-designed an RCGA referral pathway as a quality improvement change initiative. An observational cohort design measured implementation and outcomes. Consecutive patients aged 65 years or older with a new diagnosis of GCA were recruited for 15 months (<i>n</i> = 18), and outcomes were compared with a retrospective cohort of similar patients (<i>n</i> = 55). Descriptive summaries were compared between groups using non-parametric tests.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Following implementation, all eligible patients received both RCGA and individualised interventions. Forty-four per cent of patients in the RCGA group were diagnosed with delirium, dementia or mild cognitive impairment compared to 18% in the usual care group (<i>p</i> = .03).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>In this small population, implementation of an RCGA pathway was associated with increased detection of delirium, mild cognitive impairment and dementia, and allowed for implementation of individualised interventions.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55431,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal on Ageing","volume":"44 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal on Ageing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajag.70020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) carries an increased risk of stroke and blindness. International guidelines recommend older people receive routine comprehensive geriatric assessment (RCGA) during unplanned hospital admissions to improve health outcomes. This quality improvement study addressed the need for RCGA in older people with GCA at an Australian tertiary hospital. The aims of this study were to co-design, implement and evaluate a referral process for RCGA for hospitalised people 65 years or older with a new diagnosis of GCA and evaluate changes to the identification and management of falls and cognitive disorders (delirium, dementia and mild cognitive impairment).

Methods

Hospital stakeholders co-designed an RCGA referral pathway as a quality improvement change initiative. An observational cohort design measured implementation and outcomes. Consecutive patients aged 65 years or older with a new diagnosis of GCA were recruited for 15 months (n = 18), and outcomes were compared with a retrospective cohort of similar patients (n = 55). Descriptive summaries were compared between groups using non-parametric tests.

Results

Following implementation, all eligible patients received both RCGA and individualised interventions. Forty-four per cent of patients in the RCGA group were diagnosed with delirium, dementia or mild cognitive impairment compared to 18% in the usual care group (p = .03).

Conclusions

In this small population, implementation of an RCGA pathway was associated with increased detection of delirium, mild cognitive impairment and dementia, and allowed for implementation of individualised interventions.

常规全面的老年评估与老年巨细胞动脉炎患者认知障碍的改善检测相关
巨细胞动脉炎(GCA)会增加中风和失明的风险。国际指南建议老年人在计划外住院期间接受常规综合老年评估(RCGA),以改善健康结果。这项质量改进研究解决了澳大利亚一家三级医院老年GCA患者RCGA的需求。本研究的目的是共同设计、实施和评估65岁或以上新诊断为GCA的住院患者的RCGA转诊流程,并评估跌倒和认知障碍(谵妄、痴呆和轻度认知障碍)的识别和管理的变化。方法医院利益相关者共同设计了RCGA转诊途径,作为质量改进变革的倡议。观察性队列设计测量了实施和结果。连续招募65岁或以上新诊断为GCA的患者15个月(n = 18),并将结果与相似患者的回顾性队列(n = 55)进行比较。描述性摘要采用非参数检验进行组间比较。结果实施后,所有符合条件的患者均接受了RCGA和个体化干预。RCGA组44%的患者被诊断为谵妄、痴呆或轻度认知障碍,而常规护理组为18% (p = .03)。结论:在这个小群体中,RCGA通路的实施与谵妄、轻度认知障碍和痴呆的检出率增加有关,并允许实施个性化干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australasian Journal on Ageing
Australasian Journal on Ageing 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
114
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australasian Journal on Ageing is a peer reviewed journal, which publishes original work in any area of gerontology and geriatric medicine. It welcomes international submissions, particularly from authors in the Asia Pacific region.
×
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