Suchergebnisse

BACKGROUND: Frailty is frequently found to be associated with increased healthcare utilisation in western countries, but little is known in Asian population. This study was conducted to investigate the association between frailty and healthcare utilisation in different care settings among community-dwelling older adults in Singapore. METHODS: Data from a population health survey among community-dwelling adults were linked with an administrative database to retrieve data of healthcare utilisation (including government primary care clinic visits, specialised outpatient clinic visits, emergency department visits, day surgery and hospitalisations) occurred during a six-month look-back period and six-month post-baseline respectively. Baseline frailty status was measured using the five-item FRAIL scale, which was categorised into three groups: robust (0), pre-frail (1–2), and frail (3–5). Negative binomial regression was applied to examine the association between frailty with respective healthcare utilisation (dependent variables), controlling for other confounding variables. RESULTS: In our sample of 701 older adults, 64.8% were of robust health, 27.7% were pre-frail, and 7.6% were frail. Compared to the robust group, frail individuals had a higher rate of specialised outpatient clinic visits (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 2.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2–6.5), emergency department visits (IRR: 3.1, 95%CI: 1.1–8.1), day surgery attendances (IRR: 6.4, 95%CI: 1.3–30.9), and hospitalisations (IRR: 6.7, 95%CI: 2.1–21.1) in the six-month period prior to the baseline and in subsequent 6 months (IRR: 3.3, 95%CI: 1.6–7.1; 6.4, 2.4–17.2; 5.8, 1.3–25.8; 13.1, 4.9–35.0; respectively), controlling for covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was positively associated with the number of specialised outpatient clinic visits, emergency department visits, day surgeries and hospitalisations occurred during 6 months prior to and after the baseline. As frailty is a potentially reversible health state with early screening and intervention, ...

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) involves important decision making about future medical needs. The high-volume and disparate nature of ACP research makes it difficult to grasp the evidence and derive clear policy lessons for policymakers and clinicians. Aim: The aim of this study was to synthesize ACP research evidence and identify relevant contextual elements, program features, implementation principles, and impacted outcomes to inform policy and practice. Design: An overview of systematic reviews using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions was performed. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Reviews) tool. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched for ACP-related research from inception of each database to April 2017. Searches were supplemented with gray literature and manual searches. Eighty systematic reviews, covering over 1660 original articles, were included in the analysis. Results: Legislations, institutional policies, and cultural factors influence ACP development. Positive perceptions toward ACP do not necessarily translate into more end-of-life conversations. Many factors related to patients' and providers' attitudes, and perceptions toward life and mortality influence ACP implementation, decision making, and completion. Limited, low-quality evidence points to several ACP benefits, such as improved end-of-life communication, documentation of care preferences, dying in preferred place, and health care savings. Recurring features that make ACP programs effective include repeated and interactive discussion sessions, decision aids, and interventions targeting multiple stakeholders. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence highlights several elements that influence the ACP process and provides a variety of features that could support successful, effective, and sustainable ACP implementation. However, this evidence is compartmentalized and limited. Further studies evaluating ACP as a unified program and assessing the impact of ACP for different populations, settings, and contexts are needed to develop programs that are able to unleash ACP's full potential. ; MOH (Min. of Health, S'pore) ; Published version

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) involves important decision making about future medical needs. The high-volume and disparate nature of ACP research makes it difficult to grasp the evidence and derive clear policy lessons for policymakers and clinicians. Aim: The aim of this study was to synthesize ACP research evidence and identify relevant contextual elements, program features, implementation principles, and impacted outcomes to inform policy and practice. Design: An overview of systematic reviews using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions was performed. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Reviews) tool. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, Cochrane Reviews, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched for ACP-related research from inception of each database to April 2017. Searches were supplemented with gray literature and manual searches. Eighty systematic reviews, covering over 1660 original articles, were included in the analysis. Results: Legislations, institutional policies, and cultural factors influence ACP development. Positive perceptions toward ACP do not necessarily translate into more end-of-life conversations. Many factors related to patients' and providers' attitudes, and perceptions toward life and mortality influence ACP implementation, decision making, and completion. Limited, low-quality evidence points to several ACP benefits, such as improved end-of-life communication, documentation of care preferences, dying in preferred place, and health care savings. Recurring features that make ACP programs effective include repeated and interactive discussion sessions, decision aids, and interventions targeting multiple stakeholders. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence highlights several elements that influence the ACP process and provides a variety of features that could support successful, effective, and sustainable ACP implementation. However, this evidence is compartmentalized and limited. Further studies evaluating ACP as a unified program and assessing the impact of ACP for different populations, settings, and contexts are needed to develop programs that are able to unleash ACP's full potential. ; MOH (Min. of Health, S'pore) ; Published version