A systematic review of mobility instruments and their measurement properties for older acute medical patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Independent mobility is a key factor in determining readiness for discharge for older patients following acute hospitalisation and has also been identified as a predictor of many important outcomes for this patient group. This review aimed to identify a physical performance instrument that is not disease specific that has the properties required to accurately measure and monitor the mobility of older medical patients in the acute hospital setting.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Databases initially searched were Medline, Cinahl, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials without language restriction or limits on year of publication until July 2005. After analysis of this yield, a second step was the systematic search of Medline, Cinahl and Embase until August 2005 for evidence of the clinical utility of each potentially suitable instrument. Reports were included in this review if instruments described had face validity for measuring from bed bound to independent levels of ambulation, the items were suitable for application in an acute hospital setting and the instrument required observation (rather than self-report) of physical performance. Evidence of the clinical utility of each potentially suitable instrument was considered if data on measurement properties were reported.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Three instruments, the Elderly Mobility Scale (EMS), Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility (HABAM) and the Physical Performance Mobility Examination (PPME) were identified as potentially relevant. Clinimetric evaluation indicated that the HABAM has the most desirable properties of these three instruments. However, the HABAM has the limitation of a ceiling effect in an older acute medical patient population and reliability and minimally clinically important difference (MCID) estimates have not been reported for the Rasch refined HABAM. These limitations support the proposal that a new mobility instrument is required for older acute medical patients.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>No existing instrument has the properties required to accurately measure and monitor mobility of older acute medical patients.</p

Implementation of the StandingTall programme to prevent falls in older people:a process evaluation protocol

INTRODUCTION: One in three people aged 65 years and over fall each year. The health, economic and personal impact of falls will grow substantially in the coming years due to population ageing. Developing and implementing cost-effective strategies to prevent falls and mobility problems among older people is therefore an urgent public health challenge. StandingTall is a low-cost, unsupervised, home-based balance exercise programme delivered through a computer or tablet. StandingTall has a simple user-interface that incorporates physical and behavioural elements designed to promote compliance. A large randomised controlled trial in 503 community-dwelling older people has shown that StandingTall is safe, has high adherence rates and is effective in improving balance and reducing falls. The current project targets a major need for older people and will address the final steps needed to scale this innovative technology for widespread use by older people across Australia and internationally. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This project will endeavour to recruit 300 participants across three sites in Australia and 100 participants in the UK. The aim of the study is to evaluate the implementation of StandingTall into the community and health service settings in Australia and the UK. The nested process evaluation will use both quantitative and qualitative methods to explore uptake and acceptability of the StandingTall programme and associated resources. The primary outcome is participant adherence to the StandingTall programme over 6 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the South East Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC reference 18/288) in Australia and the North West- Greater Manchester South Research Ethics Committee (IRAS ID: 268954) in the UK. Dissemination will be via publications, conferences, newsletter articles, social media, talks to clinicians and consumers and meetings with health departments/managers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619001329156

Determinants of racial/ethnic differences in blood pressure management among hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND: Prior literature has shown that racial/ethnic minorities with hypertension may receive less aggressive treatment for their high blood pressure. However, to date there are few data available regarding the confounders of racial/ethnic disparities in the intensity of hypertension treatment. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of 1,205 patients who had a minimum of two hypertension-related outpatient visits to 12 general internal medicine clinics during 7/1/01-6/30/02. Using logistic regression, we determined the odds of having therapy intensified by patient race/ethnicity after adjustment for clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Blacks (81.9%) and Whites (80.3%) were more likely than Latinos (71.5%) to have therapy intensified (P = 0.03). After adjustment for racial differences in the number of outpatient visits and presence of diabetes, there were no racial differences in rates of intensification. CONCLUSION: We found that racial/ethnic differences in therapy intensification were largely accounted for by differences in frequency of clinic visits and in the prevalence of diabetes. Given the higher rates of diabetes and hypertension related mortality among Hispanics in the U.S., future interventions to reduce disparities in cardiovascular outcomes should increase physician awareness of the need to intensify drug therapy more agressively in patients without waiting for multiple clinic visits, and should remind providers to treat hypertension more aggressively among diabetic patients

Physician reported perception in the treatment of high blood pressure does not correspond to practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>High blood pressure is a significant health problem world-wide. Physician factors play a significant role in the suboptimal control of hypertension in the United States. We sought to better understand primary care physician's opinions regarding use of hypertension guidelines, patient and physician related barriers to treatment and physician treatment decision making in the management of hypertension as part of a first step in developing research tools and interventions designed to address these issues.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An IRB approved survey pertaining to physician opinion regarding the treatment of hypertension. Items consisted of questions regarding: 1) knowledge of hypertension treatment guidelines; 2) barriers to hypertension control (physician vs. patient); and 3) self-estimation of physician treatment of hypertension. Descriptive Statistics were used to describe results.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All physicians were board certified in family or general internal medicine (n = 28). Practices were located in urban (n = 12), suburban (n = 14) and inner city locations (n = 1). All physicians felt they did a good job of treating hypertension. Most physicians felt the biggest barrier to hypertension control was patient non-compliance. Half of physicians would fail to intensify treatment for hypertension when blood pressure was above recommended levels for all disease states studied (essential hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, and renal disease).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Physician ability to assess personal performance in the treatment of hypertension and physician opinion that patient noncompliance is the greatest barrier to optimal hypertension control is contradictory to reported practice behavior. Optimal blood pressure control requires increased physician understanding on the evaluation and management of blood pressure. These data provide crucial formative data to enhance the content validity of physician education efforts currently underway to improve the treatment of blood pressure in the primary care setting.</p