ArticleBMC family practice2020
Older persons are frailer after an emergency care visit to the out-of-hours general practitioner cooperative in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional descriptive TOPICS-MDS study.
Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Defining and assessing psychological frailty in older adults: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Using Design Thinking for Co-Creating an Integrated Care Pathway Including Hospital at Home for Older Adults with an Acute Moderate-Severe Respiratory Infection in the Netherlands.International journal of integrated careArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the Netherlands, community-dwelling older people with primary care emergency problems contact the General Practitioner Cooperative (GPC) after hours. However, frailty remains an often unobserved hazard with adverse health outcomes. The aim of this study was to provide insight into differences between older persons with or without GPC emergency care visits (reference group) regarding frailty and healthcare use.
methodsA cross-sectional descriptive study design was based on data from the public data repository of The Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey Minimum Dataset (TOPICS-MDS). Frailty in older persons (65+ years, n = 32,149) was measured by comorbidity, functional and psychosocial aspects, quality of life and a frailty index. Furthermore, home care use and hospital admissions of older persons were identified. We performed multilevel logistic and linear regression analyses. A random intercept model was utilised to test differences between groups, and adjustment factors (confounders) were used in the multilevel analysis.
resultsCompared to the reference group, older persons with GPC contact were frailer in the domain of comorbidity (mean difference 0.52; 95% CI 0.47-0.57, p < 0.0001) and functional limitations (mean difference 0.53; 95% CI 0.46-0.60, p < 0.0001), and they reported less emotional wellbeing (mean difference - 4.10; 95% CI -4.59- -3.60, p < 0.0001) and experienced a lower quality of life (mean difference - 0.057; 95% CI -0.064- -0.050, p < 0.0001). Moreover, older persons more often reported limited social functioning (OR = 1.50; 95% CI 1.39-1.62, p < 0.0001) and limited perceived health (OR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.39-1.62, p < 0.0001). Finally, older persons with GPC contact more often used home care (OR = 1.37; 95% CI 1.28-1.47, p < 0.0001) or were more often admitted to the hospital (OR = 2.88; 95% CI 2.71-3.06, p < 0.0001).
conclusionsOlder persons with out-of-hours GPC contact for an emergency care visit were significantly frailer in all domains and more likely to use home care or to be admitted to the hospital compared to the reference group. Potentially frail older persons seemed to require adequate identification of frailty and support (e.g., advanced care planning) both before and after a contact with the out-of-hours GPC.
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.