Department of Medicine, University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School, Austin.
Department of Population Health, University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School, Austin.
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Dec 1;3(12):e2030090. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.30090.
The vast majority of older adults desire to age in their communities, and it is not clear what helps them be successful at aging in place.
To investigate the comparative effectiveness of community-designed and community-implemented peer-to-peer (P2P) support programs vs standard community services (SCS) to promote health and wellness in at-risk older adults.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This comparative effectiveness study involved a longitudinal cohort of adults aged 65 years and older conducted between 2015 and 2017. The setting was 3 communities in which community-based organizations delivered P2P services to older adults in California, Florida, and New York. Participants in the P2P group and in the SCS group were matched at enrollment into the study according to age, sex, and race/ethnicity at each site. Data analysis was performed from October 2018 to May 2020.
P2P support was provided by trained older adult volunteers in the same community. They provided support targeted at the needs of the older adult they served, including transportation assistance, check-in calls, social activities, help with shopping, and trips to medical appointments.
Rates of hospitalization, urgent care (UC) and emergency department (ED) use, and a composite measure of health care utilization were collected over 12 months of follow-up.
A total of 503 participants were screened, 456 participants were enrolled and had baseline data (234 in the SCS group and 222 in the P2P group), and 8 participants had no follow-up data, leaving 448 participants for the main analysis (231 in the SCS group and 217 in the P2P group; 363 women [81%]; mean [SD] age, 80 [9] years). Participants in the P2P group more often lived alone, had lower incomes, and were more physically and mentally frail at baseline compared with the SCS group. After adjusting for propensity scores to account for baseline differences between the 2 groups, there was a statistically significant higher rate of hospitalization in the P2P group than in the SCS group (0.68 hospitalization per year vs 0.44 hospitalization per year; risk ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.14-2.07; P = .005) during the 12 months of observation. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the rates of ED or UC visits or composite health care utilization over the 12 months of the study.
P2P support was associated with higher rates of hospitalization but was not associated with other measures of health care utilization. Given that this is not a randomized clinical trial, it is not clear from these findings whether peer support will help older adults age in place, and the topic deserves further study.
绝大多数老年人都希望在自己的社区中安度晚年,但目前尚不清楚是什么帮助他们成功实现就地养老。
研究社区设计和实施的同伴支持计划(P2P)与标准社区服务(SCS)相比,对有风险的老年人的健康和健康的促进作用。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项比较效果的纵向队列研究,涉及 2015 年至 2017 年间在加利福尼亚州、佛罗里达州和纽约州的三个社区中进行的年龄在 65 岁及以上的成年人。该研究的地点是社区组织向加利福尼亚州、佛罗里达州和纽约州的老年人提供 P2P 服务的社区。在每个地点,根据年龄、性别和种族/民族,P2P 组和 SCS 组的参与者在入组时进行匹配。数据分析于 2018 年 10 月至 2020 年 5 月进行。
受过培训的老年志愿者在同一社区提供 P2P 支持。他们提供针对老年服务对象需求的支持,包括交通援助、签到电话、社交活动、购物帮助和医疗预约旅行。
在 12 个月的随访期间,收集了住院率、急诊(UC)和急诊(ED)使用率以及医疗保健使用的综合指标。
共筛选了 503 名参与者,有 456 名参与者登记并具有基线数据(SCS 组 234 名,P2P 组 222 名),8 名参与者没有随访数据,留下 448 名参与者进行主要分析(SCS 组 231 名,P2P 组 217 名;363 名女性[81%];平均[标准差]年龄为 80[9]岁)。与 SCS 组相比,P2P 组的参与者更经常独居、收入较低,且在基线时身体和精神状态更脆弱。在调整倾向评分以考虑两组之间的基线差异后,与 SCS 组相比,P2P 组的住院率更高(每年 0.68 次住院 vs 每年 0.44 次住院;风险比,1.54;95%置信区间,1.14-2.07;P=0.005)在 12 个月的观察期间。在 12 个月的研究期间,两组在 ED 或 UC 就诊率或综合医疗保健利用率方面无显著差异。
同伴支持与更高的住院率相关,但与其他医疗保健使用措施无关。鉴于这不是一项随机临床试验,从这些发现中尚不清楚同伴支持是否会帮助老年人就地养老,这个话题值得进一步研究。