Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Epstein 1990; Gill 2003; Karppi 1995; Rubin 1992; Trentini 2001). Three studies compared postacute organised (CGA care) with acute organised (CGA) care (Fleming 2004; Garåsen 2007; Young 2005). Three studies evaluated organised (CGA) care for subgroups of patients (e.g. dementia - Cole 1991; Volicer 1994; cancer - Retornaz 2007). Two trials evaluated CGA teams prior to patient transfer to CGA wards (Germain 1995; Harari 2007). One trial evaluated a different multidisciplinary method of working within a CGA environment (Landi 1997). We identified 22 relevant randomised controlled trials giving information on 10,315 participants across six countries. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital (Review) Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 6
Figure 2. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital (Review) Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 7
Page 1 and 2: Comprehensive geriatric assessment
Page 3 and 4: [Intervention Review] Comprehensive
Page 5 and 6: A third has evaluated the subgroup
Page 7: AARP Ageline (from 1978 to April 20
Page 11 and 12: esults are only reported where sign
Page 13 and 14: Table 1. Cost analysis Cost Analysi
Page 15 and 16: these subgroups (teams with needs-r
Page 17 and 18: Again, analysis suggested that wher
Page 19 and 20: an acute care hospital. Canadian Me
Page 21 and 22: Liem 1986 {published data only} Lie
Page 23 and 24: C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S O F S
Page 25 and 26: Asplund 2000 (Continued) Random seq
Page 27 and 28: Cohen 2002 GEMC Methods This is the
Page 29 and 30: Cohen 2002 UCOP (Continued) Selecti
Page 31 and 32: Counsell 2000 (Continued) Intervent
Page 33 and 34: Fretwell 1990 (Continued) Study pro
Page 35 and 36: Hogan 1987 (Continued) Notes Risk o
Page 37 and 38: Kircher 2007 Methods Year: 2007 Loc
Page 39 and 40: Landefeld 1995 (Continued) Allocati
Page 41 and 42: Naughton 1994 (Continued) Intervent
Page 43 and 44: Nikolaus 1999 plus ESD (Continued)
Page 45 and 46: Powell 1990 (Continued) Random sequ
Page 47 and 48: Rubenstein 1984 Methods Year: 1984
Page 49 and 50: Saltvedt 2002 (Continued) Random se
Page 51 and 52: Thomas 1993 (Continued) Patient sel
Page 53 and 54: White 1994 (Continued) Other bias U
Page 55 and 56: (Continued) Cole 1991 Evaluation of
Page 57 and 58: D A T A A N D A N A L Y S E S Compa
Page 59 and 60:
2.6 Teams (stepdown assessment) Com
Page 61 and 62:
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 CGA vers
Page 63 and 64:
(... Continued) Study or subgroup T
Page 65 and 66:
(... Continued) Study or subgroup T
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Analysis 1.10. Comparison 1 CGA ver
Page 73 and 74:
Analysis 1.12. Comparison 1 CGA ver
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
(... Continued) Study or subgroup F
Page 79 and 80:
(... Continued) Study or subgroup E
Page 81 and 82:
(... Continued) Study or subgroup E
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
10. *“outcome and process assessm
show all

Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?