...
首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet >Population-based multidimensional assessment of older people in UK general practice: a cluster-randomised factorial trial.
【24h】

Population-based multidimensional assessment of older people in UK general practice: a cluster-randomised factorial trial.

机译:英国一般实践中对老年人的基于人群的多维评估:一项集群随机析因试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: The benefit of multidimensional assessment and management of older people remains controversial. Most trials have been too small to produce adequate evidence to inform policy. We aimed to measure the effects of different approaches to assessment and management of older people. METHODS: We undertook a cluster-randomised factorial trial in 106 general practices (43219 eligible patients aged 75 years and older, 78% participation), comparing (1) universal versus targeted assessment and (2) subsequent management by hospital outpatient geriatric team versus the primary-care team. All participants received a brief multidimensional assessment followed by a nurse-led in-depth assessment in the universal group, whereas in the targeted group the in-depth assessment was offered only to those with problems established at the brief assessment. Referrals to the randomised team (geriatric management or primary care), other medical or social services, health-care workers, or agencies, and emergency referrals to the general practitioner were based on a standard protocol at the in-depth assessment. The primary endpoints were mortality, admissions to hospital and institution, and quality of life. Analysis was by intention to treat and per protocol. This trial has been assigned the International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN23494848. FINDINGS: Mortality and hospital or institutional admissions did not differ between groups. During 3 years' follow-up, significant improvements in quality of life resulted from universal versus targeted assessment in terms of homecare, and from management by geriatric team versus primary-care team, in terms of mobility, social interaction, and morale. However, only the result for social interaction was consistent with a small but important effect. INTERPRETATION: The different forms of multidimensional assessment offered almost no differences in patient outcome.
机译:背景:对老年人进行多维评估和管理的好处仍存在争议。大多数审判​​规模太小,无法提供足够的证据来告知政策。我们旨在衡量评估和管理老年人的不同方法的效果。方法:我们对106项常规操作(43219名年龄在75岁及以上的合格患者,参与率78%)进行了一项集群随机因子分析,比较了(1)通用评估与靶向评估,以及(2)医院门诊老年患者小组与后续治疗之间的比较。初级保健团队。在通用组中,所有参与者均接受了简短的多维评估,然后由护士进行了深入评估,而在目标人群中,仅针对那些在简短评估中确定有问题的人提供了深入评估。推荐给随机小组(老人管理或初级保健),其他医疗或社会服务,卫生保健工作者或机构,以及急诊推荐给全科医生,这是基于深入评估中的标准协议。主要终点是死亡率,医院和机构的入院率以及生活质量。分析是根据治疗意图和方案进行的。该试验已被分配国际标准化随机对照试验编号ISRCTN23494848。结果:两组之间的死亡率和住院或机构入院率没有差异。在3年的随访中,生活质量的显着提高来自于家庭护理方面的普遍评估和针对性评估,以及老年人在流动性,社交互动和士气方面的管理与初级保健团队的管理。但是,只有社交互动的结果与微小但重要的结果一致。解释:多维评估的不同形式在患者预后方面几乎没有差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号