ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2018
Comprehensive geriatric assessment pilot of a randomized control study in a Swedish acute hospital: a feasibility study.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02773914 (Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Frail Older People in Swedish Acute Care Settings), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Frail Older People in Swedish Acute Care Settings: A Randomized Controlled Study
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- 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 · 2019Pooled it
- Frail older people with decreased cognition can perceive reduced self-determination in self-care and social relationships.BMC geriatrics · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Positive effects on activities of daily living one year after receiving comprehensive geriatric assessment - results from the randomised controlled study CGA-Swed.BMC geriatrics · 2022Trial
- Bibliometric Analysis of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment from 2004 to 2023.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Can Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Meet Frail Older People's Needs? Results from the Randomized Controlled Study CGA-Swed.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Challenging oneself on the threshold to the world of research - frail older people's experiences of involvement in research.BMC geriatrics · 2020Article
- Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment for Frail Older People in Swedish Acute Care Settings (CGA-Swed): A Randomised Controlled Study.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- A nationwide survey of confidence and knowledge of assessment and management oral conditions amongst a sample of physicians, United Kingdom.BMC research notes · 2019Article
- Feeling Respected as a Person: a Qualitative Analysis of Frail Older People's Experiences on an Acute Geriatric Ward Practicing a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) represent an important component of geriatric acute hospital care for frail older people, secured by a multidisciplinary team who addresses the multiple needs of physical health, functional ability, psychological state, cognition and social status. The primary objective of the pilot study was to determine feasibility for recruitment and retention rates. Secondary objectives were to establish proof of principle that CGA has the potential to increase patient safety.
methodsThe CGA pilot took place at a University hospital in Western Sweden, from March to November 2016, with data analyses in March 2017. Participants were frail people aged 75 and older, who required an acute admission to hospital. Participants were recruited and randomized in the emergency room. The intervention group received CGA, a person-centered multidisciplinary team addressing health, participation, and safety. The control group received usual care. The main objective measured the recruitment procedure and retention rates. Secondary objectives were also collected regarding services received on the ward including discharge plan, care plan meeting and hospital risk assessments including risk for falls, nutrition, decubitus ulcers, and activities of daily living status.
resultParticipants were recruited from the emergency department, over 32 weeks. Thirty participants were approached and 100% (30/30) were included and randomized, and 100% (30/30) met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen participants were included in the intervention and 14 participants were included in the control. At baseline, 100% (16/16) intervention and 100% (14/14) control completed the data collection. A positive propensity towards the secondary objectives for the intervention was also evidenced, as this group received more care assessments. There was an average difference between the intervention and control in occupational therapy assessment - 0.80 [95% CI 1.06, - 0.57], occupational therapy assistive devices - 0.73 [95% CI 1.00, - 0.47], discharge planning -0.21 [95% CI 0.43, 0.00] and care planning meeting 0.36 [95% CI-1.70, -0.02]. Controlling for documented risk assessments, the intervention had for falls - 0.94 [95% CI 1.08, - 0.08], nutrition - 0.87 [95% CI 1.06, - 0.67], decubitus ulcers - 0.94 [95% CI 1.08, - 0.80], and ADL status - 0.80 [95% CI 1.04, - 0.57].
conclusionThe CGA pilot was feasible and proof that the intervention increased safety justifies carrying forward to a large-scale study.
trial registrationClinical Trials ID: NCT02773914. Registered 16 May 2016.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.