ArticleInternal medicine journal2024
How do geriatricians practise comprehensive geriatric assessment in the outpatient setting: an analysis of geriatricians' letters and a comparison to the Medicare benefits schedule requirement.
Article in Internal medicine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about what components geriatricians routinely incorporate into outpatient comprehensive geriatric assessments (CGAs).
aimsThis study explored what components of CGAs are routinely incorporated into geriatricians' letters and assessed their consistency with the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) and a recently published survey of geriatricians.
methodsWe completed a manual content analysis, supplemented by qualitative thematic analysis, of 34 letters from five geriatricians, collected as part of the GOAL Trial.
resultsWhile more than 80% of letters included each of the key clinical domains described in the Medicare Benefits Schedule and survey of geriatricians, only 62% included advanced care planning and 47% mentioned immunisations. Forty-seven percent of letters included goal setting. Few letters showed evidence of multidisciplinary working. Issues identified by the geriatrician centred around the themes of advance care planning, symptom identification and management, medical comorbidities, strategies to support quality of life and interventions to manage frailty. Patient concerns identified in the letters were cognition and mood, declining function, future planning and symptom management.
conclusionsAnalysis of geriatricians' letters provides important and novel insights into usual CGA practice. The letters provide evidence of multidimensional assessments of physical, functional, social and psychological health, and most include use of standardised tools. However, less than 50% include evidence of goal setting or multidisciplinary working. The results allow consideration of how CGAs might be carried out in the outpatient setting, so that interventions focused on improving the quality and efficacy of this intervention can be implemented.
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.