Early detection of health problems in potentially frail community-dwelling older people by general practices - project [G]OLD: design of a longitudinal, quasi-experimental study

BMC Geriatrics

Hubertus JM Vrijhoef²  Maria WJ Jansen³  Inge GP Duimel-Peeters¹  Mandy MN Stijnen⁴ 

[1] Department of Patient & Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands;National University of Singapore, Saw Swee Hock School for Public Health, Singapore, Singapore;Public Health Service South-Limburg, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), P.O. Box 2022, 6160 HA, Geleen, The Netherlands;Department of General Practice, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands

关键词: Quasi-experimental design;    General practice;    Home visit;    Comprehensive geriatric assessment;    Older people;    Frailty;   

Others  :  857933
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2318-13-7

 received in 2012-11-14, accepted in 2012-12-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Due to the ageing of the population, the number of frail older people who suffer from multiple, complex health complaints increases and this ultimately threatens their ability to function independently. Many interventions for frail older people attempt to prevent or delay functional decline, but they show contradicting results. Recent studies emphasise the importance of embedding these interventions into existing primary care systems and tailoring care to older people’s needs and wishes. This article presents the design of an evaluation study, aiming to investigate the effects and feasibility of the early detection of health problems among community-dwelling older people and their subsequent referral to appropriate care and/or well-being facilities by general practices.

Methods/Design

A longitudinal, quasi-experimental study is designed comparing 13 intervention practices with 11 control practices. General practices select eligible community-dwelling older people (≥ 75 years). Practice nurses from intervention practices (1) visit older people at home for a comprehensive assessment of their health and well-being; (2) discuss results with the GP; (3) formulate – if required – a care and treatment plan together with the patient; (4) refer patient to care and/or well-being facilities; and (5) monitor and coordinate care and follow-up. Control practices provide usual care and match the intervention practices on the presence of different primary care professionals within the practice. Primary outcome measures are health-related quality of life and disability. Additionally, attitude towards ageing, care satisfaction, health care utilisation, nursing home admission and mortality are measured. Some outcomes are assessed by means of a postal questionnaire (at baseline and after 6, 12, and 18 months follow-up), others through continuous registration over the 18-month period. A profound process evaluation will provide insight into barriers and facilitators for implementing the intervention protocol within general practices from both the patient and caregiver perspective.

Discussion

The proposed approach requires redesigning care delivery within general practices for accomplishing appropriate care for older people. A quasi-experimental design is chosen to closely resemble a real-life situation, which is desirable for future implementation after this innovation proves to be successful. Results of the effect and process evaluation will become available in 2013.

Trial registration

The Netherlands National Trial Register NTR2737

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Stijnen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Blokstra A, Baan CA, Boshuizen HC, Feenstra TL, Hoogenveen RT, Picavet HSJ, Smit HA, Wijga AH, Verschuren WMM: Vergrijzing en toekomstige ziektelast. Prognose chronische ziektenprevalentie 2005–2025 [Impact of the ageing population on burden of disease. Projections of chronic disease prevalence for 2005–2025]. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2007. [RIVM rapport 260401004]
• [2]Christensen K, Doblhammer G, Rau R, Vaupel JW: Ageing populations: the challenges ahead. Lancet 2009, 374:1196-1208.
• [3]Hébert R: Functional decline in old age. Can Med Assoc J 1997, 157:1037-1045.
• [4]Stuck AE, Siu AL, Wieland GD, Adams J, Rubenstein LZ: Comprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet 1993, 342:1032-1036.
• [5]Van Haastregt JCM, Diederiks JPM, Van Rossum E, De Witte LP, Crebolder HFJM: Effects of preventive home visits to elderly people living in the community: systematic review. Br Med J 2000, 320:754-758.
• [6]Elkan R, Kendrick D, Dewey M, Hewitt M, Robinson J, Blair M, Williams D, Brummell K: Effectiveness of home based support for older people: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br Med J 2001, 323:719-725.
• [7]Stuck AE, Egger M, Hammer A, Minder CE, Beck JC: Home visits to prevent nursing home admission and functional decline in elderly people: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. J Am Med Assoc 2002, 287:1022-1029.
• [8]Markle-Reid M, Browne G, Weir R, Gafni A, Roberts J, Henderson SR: The effectiveness and efficiency of home-based nursing health promotion for older people: a review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev 2006, 63:531-569.
• [9]Perry M, Mokkink HGA: Is het zinvol om zelfstandig wonende ouderen systematisch te bezoeken? [Is it useful to systematically visit independently living elderly people?]. Tijdschr Prakt 2006, 1:81-89.
• [10]Huss A, Stuck AE, Rubenstein LZ, Egger M, Clough-Gorr KM: Multidimensional preventive home visit programs for community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2008, 63A:298-307.
• [11]Bouman A, Van Rossum E, Nelemans P, Kempen GIJM, Knipschild P: Effects of intensive home visiting programs for older people with poor health status: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2008, 8:74. BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]Rubenstein LZ, Stuck AE: Preventive home visits for older people: defining criteria for success. Age Ageing 2001, 30:107-109.
• [13]Egger M: Commentary: when, where, and why do preventive home visits work? Br Med J 2001, 323:724-725.
• [14]Van Hout HPJ, Jansen APD, Van Marwijk HWJ, Nijpel G: Prevention of adverse health trajectories in a vulnerable elderly population through nurse home visits: randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN05358495]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2010, 65:734-742.
• [15]Nederlands Huisartsen Genootschap (NHG) Dutch Association for General Practitioners: NHG-Standpunt Toekomstvisie Huisartsenzorg. Huisartsgeneeskunde voor ouderen [Statement of the NHG, Future of General Practitioner Care. General practice medicine for older people]. Utrecht: Nederlands Huisartsen Genootschap; 2007.
• [16]Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K: Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. J Am Med Assoc 2002, 288:1775-1779.
• [17]Coleman K, Austin BT, Brach C, Wagner EH: Evidence on the chronic care model in the new millennium. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009, 28:75-85.
• [18]Boult C, Karm L, Groves C: Improving chronic care: the "Guided Care" model. Perm J 2008, 12:50-54.
• [19]Stalenhoef PA, Huijnen LGJ, Schonck RSM, Knottnerus JA, Van der Horst FG, Crebolder HFJM: Huisbezoek door de wijkverpleegkundige kan bijdragen aan de kennis van de huisarts over oudere patiënten. [Home visits by community nurses may contribute to general practitioner's information about elderly patients]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1996, 140:2464-2467.
• [20]Wilson CC, Netting FE: Comparison of self and health professionals' ratings of the health of community-based elderly. Int J Aging Hum Dev 1987, 25:11-25.
• [21]Alessi CA, Stuck AE, Aronow HU, Yuhas KE, Bula CJ, Madison R, Gold M, Segal-Gidan F, Fanello R, Rubenstein LZ, et al.: The process of care in preventive in-home comprehensive geriatric assessment. J Am Geriatr Soc 1997, 45:1044-1050.
• [22]Chen Y-M, Thompson EA: Understanding factors that influence success of home- and community-based services in keeping older adults in community settings. J Aging Health 2010, 22:267-291.
• [23]Teunissen D, Van Weel C, Lagro-Janssen T: Urinary incontinence in older people living in the community: examining help-seeking behaviour. Br J Gen Pract 2005, 55:776-782.
• [24]Cummings SR, Nevitt MC, Kidd S: Forgetting falls. The limited accuracy of recall of falls in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1988, 36:613-616.
• [25]Bender P: Deceptive distress in the elderly. Am J Nurs 1992, 92:28-32.
• [26]Beswick AD, Rees K, Dieppe P, Ayis S, Gooberman-Hill R, Horwood J, Ebrahim S: Complex interventions to improve physical function and maintain independent living in elderly people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2008, 371:725-735.
• [27]Beswick AD, Gooberman-Hill R, Smith A, Wylde V, Ebrahim S: Maintaining independence in older people. Rev Clin Gerontol 2010, 20:128-153.
• [28]Fagerström L, Wikblad A, Nilsson J: An integrative research review of preventive home visits among older people – is an individual health resource perspective a vision or a reality? Scand J Caring Sci 2008, 23:558-568.
• [29]Vass M, Avlund K, Hendriksen C, Philipson L, Riis P: Preventive home visits to older people in Denmark. Why, how, by whom, and when? Z Gerontol Geriatr 2007, 40:209-216.
• [30]Stijnen MMN, Jansen MWJ, Vrijhoef HJM, Duimel-Peeters IGP: Development of a home visitation programme for the early detection of health problems in potentially frail community-dwelling older people by general practices. Eur J Ageing 2012.
• [31]Lemieux-Charles L, McGuire WL: What do we know about health care team effectiveness? A review of the literature. Med Care Res Rev 2006, 63:263-300.
• [32]Rockwood K, Howlett SE, MacKnight C, Beattie BL, Bergman H, Hébert R, Hogan DB, Wolfson C, McDowell I: Prevalence, attributes, and outcomes of fitness and frailty in community-dwelling older adults: Report from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2004, 59:1310-1317.
• [33]Newbury J, Marley J: Preventive home visits to elderly people in the community. Visits are most useful for people aged > 75. Br Med J 2000, 321:512.
• [34]Stuck AE, Beck JC, Egger M: Preventing disability in elderly people. Lancet 2004, 364:1641-1642.
• [35]Van der Zee KI, Sanderman R: Het meten van de algemene gezondheidstoestand met de RAND-36: een handleiding [Measurement of general health status with the RAND-36: a guideline]. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken; 1993.
• [36]Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM: The RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Health Econ 1993, 2:217-227.
• [37]Kempen GIJM, Doeglas DM, Suurmeijer TPBM: Het meten van problemen met zelfredzaamheid op verzorgend en huishoudelijk gebied met de Groningen Activiteiten Restrictie Schaal (GARS): een handleiding [Measurement of disability in activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living with the Groning Activity Restriction Scale (GARS): a guideline]. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken; 1993.
• [38]Kempen GIJM, Miedema I, Ormel J, Molenaar W: The assessment of disability with the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. Conceptual framework and psychometric properties. Soc Sci Med 1996, 33:1601-1610.
• [39]Hayes V, Morris J, Wolfe C, Morgan M: The SF-36 health survey questionnaire: is it suitable for use with older adults? Age Ageing 1995, 24:120-125.
• [40]Lawton's PGC Morale Scale[http://www.abramsoncenter.org/pri/documents/PGC_morale_scale.pdf webcite]
• [41]Saunders RP, Evans MH, Joshi P: Developing a process-evaluation plan for assessing health promotion program implementation: a how-to guide. Health Promot Pract 2005, 6:134-147.
• [42]Van Breukelen GJP, Candel MJJM, Berger MPF: Relative efficiency of unequal cluster sizes for variance component estimation in cluster randomized and multicentre trials. Stat Methods Med Res 2007, 17:439-458.
• [43]Green LW, Glasgow RE: Evaluating the relevance, generalization, and applicability of research. Issues in external validation and translation methodology. Eval Health Prof 2006, 29:126-153.
• [44]Glasgow RE, Green LW, Klesges LM, Fisher E, Goldstein MG, Hayman LL, Ockene JK, Orleans CT: External validity: we need to do more. Ann Behav Med 2006, 31:105-108.
• [45]Green LW: Making research relevant: if it is an evidence-based practice, where's the practice-based evidence? Fam Pract 2008, 25:20-24.
• [46]Jansen M, Harting J, Ebben N, Kroon B, Stappers J, Van Engelshoven E, De Vries N: The concept of sustainability and the use of outcome indicators. A case study to continue a successful health counselling intervention. Fam Pract 2008, 25:32-37.