Asunto(s)
Servicios de Salud Comunitaria/organización & administración , Servicios de Salud para Ancianos/organización & administración , Anciano , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Humanos , Evaluación de Necesidades , Atención Primaria de Salud/organización & administración , Medición de Riesgo , Reino Unido , Voluntarios/organización & administración , Poblaciones Vulnerables/estadística & datos numéricos , Carga de TrabajoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: cognitive impairment is an important part of the diagnostic criteria for dementia. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is recommended to test for cognitive impairment and to monitor medication response. OBJECTIVES: we examined the prevalence of cognitive impairment in the UK and assessed associations with cognitive impairment. DESIGN: cross-sectional survey as part of a cluster randomised trial. SUBJECTS: representative sample of people aged 75 years and over. METHODS: all subjects had a detailed baseline health assessment including the MMSE. RESULTS: a total of 15,051 subjects completed the assessment (71.9%). Almost two-thirds of subjects were female (61.5%) and almost half were aged between 75 and 79 years (47.0%). The prevalence of cognitive impairment was 18.3% (95% confidence intervals (CI) = 16.0-20.9) at a cut-off of 23/24, and 3.3% (95% CI = 2.8-4.0) at 17/18. Those with impairment (MMSE 23/24) were significantly more likely to have hearing (odds ratio (OR) 1.7), vision (OR 1.7) and urinary incontinence problems (OR 1.3), have two or more falls in the previous 6 months (OR 1.4), and report poorer health (OR 1.9). Almost half the participants lived alone (n = 7,073; 47.0%) and of these almost one-fifth were impaired (MMSE 23/24; 19.4%). CONCLUSIONS: there was a high prevalence of cognitive impairment. This representative sample demonstrates the potential burden of disease and service demands. It supports the need for a broader assessment of functioning as recommended by the National Service Framework for Older People, particularly in people with cognitive impairment.
Asunto(s)
Trastornos del Conocimiento/diagnóstico , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Algoritmos , Trastornos del Conocimiento/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Escala del Estado Mental , Prevalencia , Características de la Residencia , Factores Sexuales , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación Geriátrica , Atención Primaria de Salud , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Análisis por Conglomerados , Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria , Femenino , Geriatría , Hospitalización , Humanos , Institucionalización , Masculino , Mortalidad , Oportunidad Relativa , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Servicio Ambulatorio en Hospital , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Derivación y Consulta , Servicio Social , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Several social, demographic and physical factors have been shown to be associated with depression in later life, but results have been inconsistent. We aimed to assess factors associated with depression in old age, using data from the MRC trial of assessment and management of older people in the community. METHOD: Analysis of cross-sectional data. Depression was measured with a threshold of <6/6+ on the GDS-15. Independent associations with social, demographic, physical and social network variables were assessed by logistic regression. RESULTS: In a fully adjusted analysis, odds ratios (OR) for depression were greater in older people, (adjusted OR for those aged 80-84 years = 1.1, 85-90 years = 1.5 and 90+ years = 1.8), those in rented (OR:1.3) or sheltered/residential accommodation (OR:1.5), and those widowed, divorced or separated (OR:1.2). Life events, (OR:1.4), smoking (OR:1.6), having two or more physical illnesses (OR:1.6) or no confiding relationship (OR:3.4) were also significantly associated with depression. Higher alcohol consumption was not predictive. Female sex and living alone were associated with depression in a crude analysis, but not after full adjustment for confounding. CONCLUSIONS: The importance of these results lies in the large size and representative nature of the sample. In contrast to some previous reports, increasing age was associated with increasing risk of depression, but sex, living alone and alcohol were not associated. Social isolation was more important than living alone per se. Other associations largely concurred with previous work.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Depresivo/epidemiología , Evaluación Geriátrica , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Trastorno Depresivo/diagnóstico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Características de la Residencia , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estadística como Asunto , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A concise, accurate screening question for depression would be an important contribution to the Single Assessment Process for Older People. OBJECTIVE: To examine the performance of a previously validated screening question for depression, in a large community sample. METHODS: Both the single screening question, and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) were completed by 13 670 people aged 75 and over in the community. Responses to the question were compared with a "standard" of scoring above different thresholds on the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15). RESULTS: For more severe GDS-15 depression, the best performance of the question was a sensitivity of only 52% and a specificity of 93%. CONCLUSION: Even at its best, the question therefore misses almost half the cases. This highlights the problems of such simple approaches to routine screening.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Depresivo/diagnóstico , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Anciano , Intervalos de Confianza , Trastorno Depresivo/clasificación , Trastorno Depresivo/epidemiología , Humanos , Prevalencia , Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) is recommended for screening older people, but there are no large epidemiological studies using this instrument in the UK. We describe the age and sex distribution of GDS-15 scores in the largest ever UK sample of people aged 75 and over. METHOD: We used cross-sectional data from the MRC Trial of the Assessment and Management of Older People in the Community. The GDS-15 was offered to a representative sample of UK people aged 75 and over. Proportions of people attaining thresholds on the GDS-15 were calculated by age group and sex. Crude Odds ratios (ORs) for the effect of age and sex were calculated and the sex/age adjusted ORs estimated using logistic regression for surveys, at three GDS-15 thresholds. RESULTS: Of 21 241 (71.2%; 95% Confidence intervals (CI): 67.9-74.3) eligible people, 15 126 received the assessment including the GDS-15. Of these, 14 545 (96.2%; 94.7-97.2) completed > or =13 GDS-15 answers and were included in the study. Scores showed a marked right skew, with a median of 2 (interquartile range: 1-3; range: 0-14). 34.6% (95% CI: 32.1-37.3) people scored > or =3, 8.0% (6.9-9.2) scored > or =6 and 3.1% (2.5-3.7) scored > or =8. Women were significantly more likely to score above all three thresholds than men, as were older participants. CONCLUSIONS: Depression may be common in later life. The data provide a national picture of the numbers of older people who will score positively for depression in health screens which include the GDS-15, as recommended by the Royal College of General Practitioners.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Depresivo/diagnóstico , Trastorno Depresivo/epidemiología , Evaluación Geriátrica , Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Análisis por Conglomerados , Estudios Transversales , Trastorno Depresivo/prevención & control , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Oportunidad Relativa , Escocia/epidemiología , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Distribución por Sexo , Gales/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Reduced hearing in elderly people is important because it is disabling and potentially treatable. We aimed to assess the prevalence of reduced hearing in elderly people and levels of ownership of hearing aids and use. METHODS: We have done a cross-sectional survey of people aged at least 75 years in 106 family practices in the UK. We obtained self-reported data on hearing difficulties for 32,656 people and gave 14,877 a whispered voice test (response rate 78%). FINDINGS: 2537 (8%) of 32,656 participants reported a lot of difficulty hearing and 13,630 (42%) a little or a lot of difficulty. 3795 (26%) of 14877 participants who completed the whispered voice test (95% CI 23-29) failed the test, the proportion rising sharply with age. Following wax removal, 343 passed a retest, leaving 3452 (23%, 20-26) who failed the test, even after wax removal if present. 998 (46%) of 2180 people wearing a hearing aid at the time of testing failed the whispered voice test. More than half the people who failed the test did not own a hearing aid. 2200 (60%) of 3846 people who owned a hearing aid said they used it regularly. Level of use was strongly related to perceived benefit. INTERPRETATION: Reduced hearing is common and provision of hearing aids inadequate in elderly people. Many people who own a hearing aid do not use it regularly, and even when wearing their aid many still have socially disabling levels of hearing loss. A major source of morbidity in elderly people could be alleviated by improvements in detection and management of reduced hearing.