Wenger Neil S, Solomon David H, Amin Alpesh, Besdine Richard K, Blazer Dan G, Cohen Harvey, Fulmer Terry, Ganz Patricia A, Grunwald Mark, Hall William J, Katz Paul R, Kitzman Dalane W, Leipzig Rosanne M, Rosenthal Ronnie A
RAND Health, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Oct;55 Suppl 2:S457-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01375.x.
To use a formal decision-making strategy to reach clinically appropriate, internally consistent decisions on the application of quality indicators (QIs) to vulnerable elders (VEs) with advanced dementia (AD) or poor prognosis (PP).
Using a conceptual model that classifies QIs principally by aim and burden of the care process, 12 clinical experts rated whether each Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders-3 (ACOVE-3) QI should be applied in evaluating quality of care for older persons with AD or PP. QI exclusions were assessed for each of the 26 conditions and by whether these conditions were mainly medical (e.g., diabetes mellitus), geriatric (e.g., falls), or crosscutting processes of care (e.g., pain management). QI exclusions were also identified for older persons who decided against hospitalization or surgery.
Of 392 ACOVE-3 QIs, 140 (36%) were excluded for patients with AD and 135 (34%) for patients with PP; 57% of QIs focusing on medical conditions were excluded from patients with AD and 53% from patients with PP, whereas only 20% of QIs for geriatric conditions were excluded from AD and 15% from PP. All QIs with care processes judged to carry a heavy burden were excluded; 86% of moderate-burden QIs were excluded from AD and 92% from PP. All QIs aimed at long-term goals were excluded; 83% of intermediate-term goal QIs were excluded from AD and 98% from PP. Individuals holding a preference to forgo hospitalization or surgery would be excluded from 7% of potentially applicable QIs.
Measurement of quality of care for VEs with AD, PP, and less-aggressive care preferences should include only a subset of the ACOVE-3 QIs, largely those whose burden is light and whose goal is continuity or short-term improvement or prevention.
运用一种正式的决策策略,就质量指标(QIs)应用于患有晚期痴呆(AD)或预后不良(PP)的弱势老年人(VEs)做出临床适宜且内在一致的决策。
采用一个主要依据护理过程的目标和负担对质量指标进行分类的概念模型,12位临床专家对每个弱势老年人护理评估-3(ACOVE-3)质量指标是否应应用于评估患有AD或PP的老年人的护理质量进行评分。针对26种情况中的每一种,以及这些情况是主要为医疗(如糖尿病)、老年病(如跌倒)还是跨领域护理过程(如疼痛管理),对质量指标的排除情况进行了评估。还确定了那些决定不接受住院治疗或手术的老年人的质量指标排除情况。
在392个ACOVE-3质量指标中,AD患者排除了140个(36%),PP患者排除了135个(34%);针对医疗状况的质量指标中,57%被排除用于AD患者,53%被排除用于PP患者,而针对老年病状况的质量指标中,只有20%被排除用于AD患者,15%被排除用于PP患者。所有被判定护理过程负担沉重的质量指标均被排除;86%负担中等的质量指标被排除用于AD患者,92%被排除用于PP患者。所有旨在长期目标的质量指标均被排除;83%中期目标质量指标被排除用于AD患者,98%被排除用于PP患者。那些倾向于放弃住院治疗或手术的个体将被排除在7%的潜在适用质量指标之外。
对患有AD、PP以及护理偏好不积极的弱势老年人的护理质量进行测量时,应仅包括ACOVE-3质量指标的一个子集,主要是那些负担较轻且目标为连续性、短期改善或预防的指标。