Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr Suppl ; (9): 201-6, 2004.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15207415

ABSTRACT

The aim was to validate an abbreviated version of the Gijon's social-familial evaluation scale (SFES) (Barcelona-SFES version), on patients with cognitive impairment. A group of 34 patients with cognitive impairment, admitted to an intermediate-long-term-care facility, were analyzed. Mean age was 80.2 +/- 7.4 years. Gijón's SFES was abbreviated and only the first three item groups corresponding to family conditions, social contacts and assistance from the social network were selected. Barcelona-SFES version had a range score between 3 to 15 points, in which low scores identify older patients who live with their family, have good contacts, and participate in community activities. In contrast, high scores identify older persons who live alone and have poor social support and little participation with community activities. Three social risk categories were established according to the Barcelona-SFES score: low social risk (>/= 7 points), intermediate social risk (8-9 points) and high social points). Validation criteria used in the present study were: predictive value of Barcelona-SFES score of post-discharge destination (home or institution), and patient's (or family's) request for a definitive institutionalization in a nursing home. There were 9 patients with low social risk (26.4 %), 8 with intermediate social risk (23.5 %) and 17 with high social risk (50 %). A significant relationship between Barcelona-SFES scores and post-discharge destination was found. Eighty percent of patients discharged to an institution(nursing and residential homes), they had high social risk SFES scores (>/= 10) Also, a significant correlation was found between the number of patients for which a definitive institutionalization request was performed and the Barcelona-SFES scores. Fifteen (88.2 %) of the 18 patients for whom the request was done, were in the high social risk group. The lowest scores from SFES were predictive of home discharge, while the highest scores were predictive of a definitive institutionalization.


Subject(s)
Cognition Disorders/diagnosis , Family Relations , Social Behavior , Surveys and Questionnaires , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cognition Disorders/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Institutionalization/statistics & numerical data , Long-Term Care/statistics & numerical data , Male , Neuropsychological Tests , Predictive Value of Tests , Reproducibility of Results , Severity of Illness Index
2.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr Suppl ; (9): 333-7, 2004.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15207431

ABSTRACT

The aim was to evaluate the prevalence of delirium among patients discharged from an acute care hospital and admitted to a geriatric convalescence unit (GCU), and to analyze patient's characteristics and risk precipitating factors. Sixty-eight patients were analyzed during a 2-week period. The confusion assessment method (CAM) was used to detect delirium. The precipitating factors evaluated were: major surgery-intensive care unit(ICU) stay, pulmonary and heart failure, acute infections, metabolic disorders/anemia,psychoactive medications, other drugs, severe pain, changing environmental influences and others. According to CAM, fifteen patients presented delirium (22%), and in 14 of them(93.3 %) the delirium was developed before admission at GCU. The precipitating factors in the studied population were the following: changing environmental influences in 66 patients(97%) (15 with delirium and 51 without delirium); other drugs 56 (82.3 %) (11 vs. 45);others 56 (82.3%) (9 vs. 24); psychoactive medications 50 (73.5%) (12 vs. 38); acute infections 48 (70.5 %) (13 vs. 35); metabolic disorders/anemia 40 (58.8 %) (9 vs. 31); major surgery-ICU stay 28 (41 .1%) (8 vs. 20); severe pain 26 (38.2%) (6 vs. 20); pulmonary and heart failure 22 (32.3%) (5 vs. 17). The univariant analysis showed that, none of the precipitating factors studied was significantly related to delirium. Seventy-two patients (91.1%) had simultaneously >3 precipitating factors. There were 16 patients with >6 precipitating factors, 7 of 15 with delirium and 9 of the 53 without delirium (46.6 % vs 16.9 %) (p < 0.05). The prevalence of delirium has been 22 %. Most of the patients had developed delirium before the admission at GCU. A high proportion of patients had >3 precipitating factors. In the study the presence of > 6 precipitating factors simultaneously has been significantly related to delirium.


Subject(s)
Convalescence , Delirium/epidemiology , Delirium/rehabilitation , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Cognition Disorders/diagnosis , Cognition Disorders/epidemiology , Delirium/drug therapy , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Female , Health Status , Hospital Departments , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Neuropsychological Tests , Prevalence , Psychotropic Drugs/therapeutic use , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...