Wong Eric Kai-Chung, Tricco Andrea C, Isaranuwatchai Wanrudee, Naimark David M J, Straus Sharon E, Sale Joanna E M
Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
BMC Geriatr. 2025 Jan 18;25(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12877-025-05691-5.
With a shortage of geriatricians and an aging population, strategies are needed to optimise the distribution of geriatricians across different healthcare settings (acute care, rehabilitation and community clinics). The perspectives of knowledge users on staffing geriatricians in different healthcare settings are unknown. We aimed to understand the acceptability and feasibility (including barriers and facilitators) of implementing a geriatrician-led comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in acute care, rehabilitation, and community clinic settings.
A qualitative description approach was used to explore the experience of those implementing (administrative staff), providing (healthcare providers), and receiving (patients/family caregivers) a geriatrician-led CGA in acute care, rehabilitation and community settings. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Toronto, Canada. The theoretical domains framework and consolidated framework for implementation research informed the interview guide development. Analysis was conducted using a thematic approach.
Of the 27 participants (8 patients/caregivers, 9 physicians, 10 administrators), the mean age was 53 years and 14 participants (52%) identified as a woman (13 [48%] identified as a man). CGAs were generally perceived as acceptable but there was a divergence in opinion about which healthcare setting was most important for geriatricians to staff. Acute care was reported to be most important by some because no other care provider has the intersection of acute medicine skills with geriatric training. Others reported that community clinics were most important to manage geriatric syndromes before hospitalization was necessary. The rehabilitation setting appeared to be viewed as important but as a secondary setting. Facilitators to implementing a geriatrician-led CGA included (i) a multidisciplinary team, (ii) better integration with primary care, (iii) a good electronic patient record system, and (iv) innovative ways to identify patients most in need of a CGA. Barriers to implementing a geriatrician-led CGA included (i) lack of resources or administrative support, (ii) limited team building, and (iii) consultative model where recommendations were made but not implemented.
Overall, participants found CGAs acceptable yet had different preferences of which setting to prioritise staffing if there was a shortage of geriatricians. The main barriers to implementing the geriatrician-led CGA related to lack of resources.
Not applicable.
随着老年医学专家短缺以及人口老龄化,需要制定策略来优化老年医学专家在不同医疗环境(急性护理、康复和社区诊所)中的分布。知识使用者对于在不同医疗环境中配备老年医学专家的看法尚不清楚。我们旨在了解在急性护理、康复和社区诊所环境中实施由老年医学专家主导的综合老年评估(CGA)的可接受性和可行性(包括障碍和促进因素)。
采用定性描述方法,探讨在急性护理、康复和社区环境中实施(行政人员)、提供(医疗服务提供者)和接受(患者/家庭护理人员)由老年医学专家主导的CGA的经验。在加拿大多伦多进行了半结构化访谈。实施研究的理论领域框架和综合框架为访谈指南的制定提供了依据。采用主题分析法进行分析。
27名参与者(8名患者/护理人员、9名医生、10名行政人员)的平均年龄为53岁,14名参与者(52%)为女性(13名[48%]为男性)。CGA总体上被认为是可接受的,但对于老年医学专家应优先在哪个医疗环境中工作,存在意见分歧。一些人报告说急性护理最为重要,因为没有其他护理提供者具备急性医学技能与老年医学培训的交集。另一些人则报告说社区诊所在必要住院治疗前管理老年综合征方面最为重要。康复环境似乎被视为重要,但作为次要环境。实施由老年医学专家主导的CGA的促进因素包括:(i)多学科团队;(ii)与初级保健更好地整合;(iii)良好的电子病历系统;(iv)识别最需要CGA的患者的创新方法。实施由老年医学专家主导的CGA的障碍包括:(i)缺乏资源或行政支持;(ii)团队建设有限;(iii)提出建议但未实施的咨询模式。
总体而言,参与者认为CGA是可接受的,但如果老年医学专家短缺,对于优先在哪个环境中配备人员有不同偏好。实施由老年医学专家主导的CGA的主要障碍与资源缺乏有关。
不适用。