Hospital and outpatient clinic utilization among older people in the 3-5 years following the initiation of continuing care: a longitudinal cohort study

Background: Few studies have investigated the subsequent rate of hospital and outpatient clinic utilization in those who receive continuing care and have documented frequent usage over one year. Such knowledge may be helpful in identifying those who would benefit from preventive interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the subsequent rate of hospital and outpatient clinic utilization among older people with 0, 1, 2, 3 or more hospital stays in the first year following the initiation of continuing care. A further aim was to compare these groups regarding demographic data, health complaints, functional and cognitive ability, informal care and mortality. Methods: A total of 1079 people, aged 65 years or older, who received a decision regarding the initiation of continuing care during the years 2001, 2002 or 2003 were investigated. Four groups were created based on whether they had 0, 1, 2 or >= 3 hospital stays in the first year following the initiation of continuing care and were investigated regarding the rate of hospital and outpatient clinic utilization in the subsequent 3-5 years. Results: Fifty seven percent of the sample had no hospital stay during the first year following the initiation of continuing care, 20% had 1 stay, 10% had 2 stays and 13% had three or more hospital stays (range: 3-13). Those with >= 3 hospital stays in the first year continued to have the significantly highest rate of hospital and outpatient care utilization in the subsequent years. This group accounted for 57% of hospital stays in the first year, 27% in the second year and 18% in the third year. In this group the risk of having >= 3 hospital stays in the second year was 27% and 12% in the third year. Conclusions: There is a clear need for interventions targeted on prevention of frequent hospital and outpatient clinic utilization among those who are high users of hospital care in the first year after the initiation of continuing care. Perhaps an increased availability of medically skilled staff in the day to day care of these people in the municipalities could prevent frequent hospital and outpatient clinic utilization, especially hospital readmissions

Reporting ethical approval in health and social science articles : an audit of adherence to GDPR and national legislation

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have indicated that failure to report ethical approval is common in health science articles. In social sciences, the occurrence is unknown. The Swedish Ethics Review Act requests that sensitive personal data, in accordance with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), should undergo independent ethical review, irrespective of academic discipline. We have explored the adherence to this regulation. METHODS: Using the Web of Science databases, we reviewed 600 consecutive articles from three domains (health sciences with and without somatic focus and social sciences) based on identifiable personal data published in 2020. RESULTS: Information on ethical review was lacking in 12 of 200 health science articles with somatic focus (6%), 21 of 200 health science articles with non-somatic focus (11%), and in 54 of 200 social science articles (27%; p < 0.001 vs. both groups of health science articles). Failure to report on ethical approval was more common in (a) observational than in interventional studies (p < 0.01), (b) articles with only 1-2 authors (p < 0.001) and (c) health science articles from universities without a medical school (p < 0.001). There was no significant association between journal impact factor and failure to report ethical approval. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that reporting of research ethics approval is reasonably good, but not strict, in health science articles. Failure to report ethical approval is about three times more frequent in social sciences compared to health sciences. Improved adherence seems needed particularly in observational studies, in articles with few authors and in social science research

PHASE-20: ett nytt instrument för skattning av möjliga läkemedelsrelaterade symtom hos äldre personer i äldreboende

Beskriver utvikling og testing av et instrument for å avdekke og måle symptomer som kan være relatert til legemiddelbruk hos eldre.Background. Elderly persons may easily develop adverse drug effects. In Sweden, at least seven untested instruments are used for assessing possible drug-related symptoms in elderly people. Aim. The aim was to develop a more valid and reliable instrument for identification of possible therapeutic drug-related symptoms. Methods. The seven pre-existing instruments consisted of 39 symptoms, which were coordinated and then analyzed for content validity. After revision, the instrument included 19 symptoms or symptom-groups and one open variable. To assess the construct validity and reliability, the new instrument, PHASE-20, was tested in a randomized controlled trial with elderly persons living in two nursing homes before and after evaluation and correction of their therapeutic drugs. Results. PHASE-20 was found to possess an acceptable consistency, test-retest reliability, and internal validity. Construct validity was not supported in this study, as there were no significant differences between groups after the intervention. Therapeutic drug-related symptoms among elderly might be too heterogeneous to be captured into a screening instrument. However, PHASE-20 was welcomed by both patients and staff as a well structured, easily understandable, and useful assessment instrument. Conclusion. PHASE-20 can be used for identifying possible drug-related symptoms among elderly who are able to cooperate at least partly

Development of the PHASE-Proxy scale for rating drug-related signs and symptoms in severe cognitive impairment

OBJECTIVES: The need for assessment of possible drug-related signs and symptoms in older people with severe cognitive impairment has increased. In 2009, the PHASE-20 rating scale for identifying symptoms possibly related to medication was the first such scale to be found valid and reliable for use with elderly people. In this project, the aim was to develop and examine the psychometric properties and clinical utility of PHASE-Proxy, a similar scale for proxy use in assessing elderly people with cognitive impairment. METHODS: Three expert groups revised PHASE-20 into a preliminary proxy version, which was then tested for inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and content validity. Its clinical usefulness was investigated by pharmacist-led medication reviews. Group interviews and a study-specific questionnaire with nursing home staff were used to investigate the feasibility of use. RESULTS: The PHASE-Proxy scale had satisfactory levels of inter-rater reliability (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient; rs = 0.8), and acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient; α = 0.73). The factor analysis resulted in a logical solution with seven factors, grouped into two dimensions: signs of emotional distress and signs of physical discomfort. The medication reviews, interviews, and questionnaires also found the proxy scale to be clinically useful, and feasible to use. CONCLUSION: The PHASE-Proxy scale appears to be a valid instrument that enables proxies to reliably assess nursing home residents who cannot participate in the assessment, to identify possible drug-related signs and symptoms. It also appears to be clinically useful and feasible for use in this population