Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24103444›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013

Specialist geriatric medical assessment for patients discharged from hospital acute assessment units: randomised controlled trial.

Judi Edmans, Lucy Bradshaw, Matthew Franklin, John Gladman, Simon Conroy

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions to Promote Early Discharge and Avoid Inappropriate Hospital (Re)Admission: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. ICECAP-O, the current state of play: a systematic review of studies reporting the psychometric properties and use of the instrument over the decade since its publication.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Judi EdmansUniversity of Nottingham, Division of Rehabilitation and Ageing, Medical School, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Lucy Bradshaw
Matthew Franklin
John Gladman
Simon Conroy

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the effect of specialist geriatric medical management on the outcomes of at risk older people discharged from acute medical assessment units.

designIndividual patient randomised controlled trial comparing intervention with usual care.

settingTwo hospitals in Nottingham and Leicester, UK.

participants433 patients aged 70 or over who were discharged within 72 hours of attending an acute medical assessment unit and at risk of decline as indicated by a score of at least 2 on the Identification of Seniors At Risk tool.

interventionAssessment made on the acute medical assessment unit and further outpatient management by specialist physicians in geriatric medicine, including advice and support to primary care services.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the number of days spent at home (for those admitted from home) or days spent in the same care home (if admitted from a care home) in the 90 days after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were determined at 90 days and included mortality, institutionalisation, dependency, mental wellbeing, quality of life, and health and social care resource use.

resultsThe two groups were well matched for baseline characteristics, and withdrawal rates were similar in both groups (5%). Mean days at home over 90 days' follow-up were 80.2 days in the control group and 79.7 in the intervention group. The 95% confidence interval for the difference in means was -4.6 to 3.6 days (P=0.31). No significant differences were found for any of the secondary outcomes.

conclusionsThis specialist geriatric medical intervention applied to an at risk population of older people attending and being discharged from acute medical units had no effect on patients' outcomes or subsequent use of secondary care or long term care.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAcute DiseaseAgedFollow-Up StudiesGeriatric AssessmentHome Care ServicesHospital UnitsHumansInstitutionalizationOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Discharge

Identifiers

PMID24103444
PMCPMC3793323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.