Rehabilitation, Palliative and Aged Care Division, Southern Adelaide Local Health Network, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia.
College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Caring Futures Institute, Flinders University, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia.
Australas J Ageing. 2024 Jun;43(2):420-425. doi: 10.1111/ajag.13330. Epub 2024 May 26.
Frailty is common in hospitalised older people. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of frailty provide recommendations for identification and management; however, adoption into practice in hospitals is limited. This study identified and quantified the evidence-practice gap between frailty guidelines and clinical practice in two hospitals using an audit tool.
A cross-sectional audit of medical records of frail older patients admitted to two hospitals was conducted. Data were collected using an audit tool based on the Asia Pacific Clinical Practice Guidelines for frailty management. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and inter-rater reliability of the tool was assessed.
Auditing of n = 70 electronic medical records showed that assessment of frailty in the acute setting did not regularly occur (17%). Few participants received guideline-recommended interventions. Physiotherapy treatment was limited, with 23% of participants receiving progressive resistance strength training. Gaps exist in provision of nutritional supplementation (26%) with limited recordings of weight during the admission for 10% of participants. Pharmacy review of medications was consistently documented on admission (84%) and discharge (93%). Vitamin D was prescribed for 57% of participants. Inter-rater reliability showed a high level of agreement using the audit tool.
An audit tool was feasible to assess frailty evidence-practice gaps in the hospital setting. Further understanding of the contextual barriers is needed to inform implementation strategies (dedicated staffing, education and training and ongoing audit of practice cycles) for the uptake of frailty guidelines in hospital settings.
虚弱是住院老年人中常见的问题。虚弱管理的临床实践指南为识别和管理提供了建议;然而,在医院实施的情况有限。本研究使用审核工具,确定并量化了两家医院虚弱指南与临床实践之间的证据-实践差距。
对两家医院收治的虚弱老年患者的病历进行了横断面审核。数据收集使用了基于亚太地区虚弱管理临床实践指南的审核工具。使用描述性统计和工具的内部一致性进行数据分析。
对 n = 70 份电子病历进行审核显示,急性环境下的虚弱评估并不经常进行(17%)。很少有参与者接受了指南推荐的干预措施。物理治疗治疗有限,只有 23%的参与者接受渐进式阻力力量训练。在营养补充方面存在差距(26%),有 10%的参与者在入院期间体重记录有限。入院时(84%)和出院时(93%)始终记录了药房对药物的审查。57%的参与者开了维生素 D。使用审核工具的内部一致性显示出高度的一致性。
审核工具可用于评估医院环境中的虚弱证据-实践差距。需要进一步了解背景障碍,以便为在医院环境中采用虚弱指南制定实施策略(专用人员配备、教育和培训以及实践周期的持续审核)。