A Multicomponent Model to Improve Hospital Care of Older Adults with Cognitive Impairment: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a multicomponent intervention improves care in hospitalized older adults with cognitive impairment. DESIGN: One-year retrospective chart review with propensity score matching on critical demographic and clinical variables was used to compare individauls with cognitive impairmenet on intervention and nonintervention units. SETTING: Large tertiary medical center. PARTICIPANTS: All hospitalized individuals age 65 and older with cognitive impairment admitted to medicine who required constant or enhanced observation for behavioral and psychological symptoms. INTERVENTION: Multicomponent intervention (geographic unit cohorting, multidisciplinary approach, patient engagement specialists (PES), staff education) or usual care. MEASUREMENTS: In-hospital mortality, length of stay, readmission, management of behavioral disturbances. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 476 of the 712 intervention visits were pair-matched with 476 of the 558 usual care visits. Matching was successful in balancing baseline covariates between intervention and usual care units. Individuals admitted to the intervention unit had lower in-hospital mortality (1.1% vs 2.9%, p=0.05) and shorter stays (5.0 vs 5.8 days, p=0.04). There was no difference in discharge home (p=0.90) or 30-day readmission rates (p=0.44). Individuals on the intervention unit were less likely than those receivng usual care to have an order for constant (12.0% vs 45.8%, p<0.01) or enhanced (22.1% vs 79.6%, p<0.01) observation, to be taking benzodiazepines (26.3% vs 38.0%, p<0.01), to be taking nothing by mouth (29.6% vs 40.8%, p=0.01), to be on bedrest (17.0% vs 25.8%, p=0.01), to be taking antipsychotics (41.2% vs 54.0%, p<0.01), or to have restraints (3.2% vs 6.9%, p=.01). CONCLUSION: A multicomponent intervention of geographic cohorting, multidisciplinary approach, PES, and staff education may offer a new paradigm in the management of hospitalized older adults with cognitive impairment.

Impact of geriatric consultation on the number of medications in hospitalized older patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the impact of the geriatric consultation on the number of medications in hospitalized older adults and the corresponding financial impact. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of patients seen by geriatric consultants. SETTING: Tertiary-care teaching hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The number of medications prescribed before hospitalization, at time of consult, and at discharge, and the number and category of medications adjusted by the geriatrician. The monthly cost of the pharmaceutical interventions was computed based on the drugstore.com cost of acquisition of drugs. RESULTS: A cohort of 62 patients was reviewed with a mean age of 84.6 (± 7.3) years; 79% were women. The patients presented with an average of 5.6 (± 2.1) comorbidities of which hypertension, dementia, and musculoskeletal disorders were the most common. The most common reasons for geriatric consultations were neuropsychiatric, nutritional, and gait-related issues. The geriatric consultant identified 2.96 (± 1.5) additional diagnoses, of which debility, delirium, and pain were the most prevalent. The average number of medications on admission was 7.7 (± 3.7) and at discharge was 9.5 (± 2.12). The average number of medications adjusted by the geriatric consultant was 2.96 (± 2.12). The most common classes of adjusted medications were pain medications (22%), nutrition (13%), bowel regimens (8.5%), antipsychotics (8%), and osteoporosis (8%). The cost impact of the pharmaceutical intervention ranged between -$343 and $2,607, with an average increase of $102 (± 368). CONCLUSION: Geriatric consultations increased the total number of medications and the cost of medications used by elderly patients.

Evaluation of housestaff knowledge and perception of competence in palliative symptom management.

PURPOSE: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires that internal medicine (IM) core curricula include end-of-life care and pain management concepts and that fellows in hematology/oncology, pulmonary/critical care, and geriatrics should receive formal instruction and clinical experience in palliative and end-of-life care. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of current teaching methods for housestaff in these fields. METHOD: All of the IM residents, geriatric medicine fellows, hematology/oncology fellows, and pulmonary/critical care fellows from four regional graduate medical education sites were asked to participate in an online survey at the beginning and end of the 2008-2009 academic year. We evaluated seven domains of knowledge of palliative care and pain management with a self-assessment of competence in these areas. We also asked participants to describe their current curriculum and training in palliative medicine. RESULTS: There were 326 e-mailed survey invitations. There were 180 responses for the start-year survey and 102 responses for the end-year survey. All sites were represented in the responses. The only learners to significantly improve their palliative knowledge during a year of training were PGY-1s and PGY-4s. The majority of housestaff surveyed report that their current palliative medicine training is inadequate. The vast majority (84.6%) said a dedicated palliative medicine rotation would be "useful" or "very useful." CONCLUSIONS: Housestaff recognize their lack of experience and training in palliative medicine and are interested in many teaching venues to improve their skills. A more focused curriculum in palliative and end-of-life care is required at both resident and subspecialty fellowship levels.