Author
Listed:
- Jita G Hoogerduijn
- Marieke J Schuurmans
- Johanna C Korevaar
- Bianca M Buurman
- Sophia E De Rooij
Abstract
Aims and objectives. To establish a screening instrument for identifying older hospitalised patients at risk for functional decline by comparing the predictive values of three screening instruments: identification of seniors at risk, care complexity prediction instrument and hospital admission risk profile. Background. After being hospitalised, 30–60% of older patients experience a decline in functioning, resulting in a decreased quality of life and autonomy. Design. A prospective cohort study. Methods. Included were patients, aged 65 years and older, acutely admitted to a general internal ward of a university teaching hospital. Within 48 hours after hospital admission, baseline data were completed – demographic, cognitive, social and pre‐admission functional status and the screening instruments. Three months after discharge, functional status was measured by telephone interview. The Katz index was used to measure functional status (six activities). Functional decline was defined as a decline of at least one point on the Katz index at three months after discharge compared to pre‐admission state. Results. Included were 177 patients; mean age was 77·6 years and 51·7 % were male. Functional decline was found in 27·8% of all patients. Sensitivity, specificity and area under receiver operating curve for identification of seniors at risk (ISAR) were 93, 39% and 0·67, respectively. The corresponding results for the care complexity prediction instrument (COMPRI) were 70, 62% and 0·69 and for the hospital admission risk profile (HARP) 21, 89% and 0·56. Conclusion. The discriminative values of both identification of seniors at risk and care complexity prediction instrument are fair. Hospital admission risk profile shows the poorest results. Identification of seniors at risk shows the best ability to predict those patients at risk for functional decline and seems to be the easiest instrument in clinical practice. Relevance to clinical practice. Identifying patients at risk for functional decline is a first step in prevention, followed by geriatric assessment and targeted interventions. Studying the validity of existing instruments is necessary before implementation in clinical practice.
Suggested Citation
Jita G Hoogerduijn & Marieke J Schuurmans & Johanna C Korevaar & Bianca M Buurman & Sophia E De Rooij, 2010.
"Identification of older hospitalised patients at risk for functional decline, a study to compare the predictive values of three screening instruments,"
Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(9‐10), pages 1219-1225, May.
Handle:
RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:9-10:p:1219-1225
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03035.x
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:9-10:p:1219-1225. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.