Azarias Eleni, Thillainadesan Janani, Hanger Carl, Scott John, Boudville Amanda, Moran Chris, O'Sullivan Robert, Maddison John, Eagar Kathy, Harvey Gillian, King Alison, Kearney Leanne, Naganathan Vasi
The University of Sydney Centre for Education and Research on Ageing, Concord, New South Wales, Australia.
University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Australas J Ageing. 2024 Dec;43(4):748-761. doi: 10.1111/ajag.13331. Epub 2024 May 26.
To describe the types of hospital and out-of-hospital services provided by public geriatric medicine departments in Australia and New Zealand, and to explore head of department (HOD) views on issues in current and future service provision.
An electronic survey was sent to HODs of public geriatric medicine departments.
Seventy-six (89%) of 85 identified HODs completed the survey. Seventy-one (93%) departments admit inpatients and 51 (67%) admit acute inpatients, with variable admission criteria. Sixty-four (84%) have hospitals with an inpatient general medicine service, and 58 (91%) of these admit older patients with acute geriatric issues. Sixty (79%) departments provide inpatient rehabilitation. Forty (53%) have beds for behavioural symptoms of dementia and/or delirium. Seventy (92%) provide a proactive orthogeriatric service. In terms of out-of-hospital services, 74 (97%) departments have outpatient clinics, 59 (78%) have telehealth and 68 (89%) perform home visits. Forty-five (59%) provide an inreach/outreach service to nursing homes. The most frequent gaps in service provision identified by HODs were acute geriatrics, surgical liaison, a designated dementia/delirium behavioural management unit, geriatricians in Emergency, outreach/inreach to residential care and shared care with some medical specialities. Increasing staff numbers and government policy change were the most frequently identified ways to address these gaps.
Geriatric medicine service provision is variable across Australia and New Zealand, with key gaps identified. These findings will inform future directions in implementation of geriatric medicine models of care and discussions with various levels of government about the ongoing development of geriatric medicine services.
描述澳大利亚和新西兰公立老年医学科提供的医院内和医院外服务类型,并探讨科室主任对当前和未来服务提供中问题的看法。
向公立老年医学科的科室主任发送了电子调查问卷。
85名确定的科室主任中有76名(89%)完成了调查。71个(93%)科室收治住院患者,51个(67%)科室收治急性住院患者,入院标准各不相同。64个(84%)科室所在医院设有住院普通内科服务,其中58个(91%)收治患有急性老年问题的老年患者。60个(79%)科室提供住院康复服务。40个(53%)科室设有治疗痴呆和/或谵妄行为症状的床位。70个(92%)科室提供主动式老年骨科服务。在医院外服务方面,74个(97%)科室设有门诊,59个(78%)科室提供远程医疗服务,68个(89%)科室进行家访。45个(59%)科室为养老院提供内驻/外展服务。科室主任指出的最常见的服务提供差距包括急性老年医学、外科联络、指定的痴呆/谵妄行为管理单元、急诊科的老年医学专家、与住宿护理机构的外展/内驻服务以及与一些医学专科的共享护理。增加工作人员数量和政府政策变化是解决这些差距最常提到的方法。
澳大利亚和新西兰的老年医学服务提供情况各不相同,存在一些关键差距。这些发现将为未来老年医学护理模式的实施方向以及与各级政府就老年医学服务的持续发展进行的讨论提供参考。