58 resultados para Health risk
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
Early intervention can help to reduce the burden of disability in the older population, but many do not access preventive care. There is uncertainty over what factors influence case finding in older patients in general practice.
Resumo:
Background. To explore effects of a health risk appraisal for older people (HRA-O) program with reinforcement, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in 21 general practices in Hamburg, Germany. Methods. Overall, 2,580 older patients of 14 general practitioners trained in reinforcing recommendations related to HRA-O-identified risk factors were randomized into intervention (n = 878) and control (n = 1,702) groups. Patients (n = 746) of seven additional matched general practitioners who did not receive this training served as a comparison group. Patients allocated to the intervention group, and their general practitioners, received computer-tailored written recommendations, and patients were offered the choice between interdisciplinary group sessions (geriatrician, physiotherapist, social worker, and nutritionist) and home visits (nurse). Results. Among the intervention group, 580 (66%) persons made use of personal reinforcement (group sessions: 503 [87%], home visits: 77 [13%]). At 1-year follow-up, persons in the intervention group had higher use of preventive services (eg, influenza vaccinations, adjusted odds ratio 1.7; 95% confidence interval 1.4–2.1) and more favorable health behavior (eg, high fruit/fiber intake, odds ratio 2.0; 95% confidence interval 1.6–2.6), as compared with controls. Comparisons between intervention and comparison group data revealed similar effects, suggesting that physician training alone had no effect. Subgroup analyses indicated favorable effects for HRA-O with personal reinforcement, but not for HRA-O without reinforcement. Conclusions. HRA-O combined with physician training and personal reinforcement had favorable effects on preventive care use and health behavior.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: This paper describes the study protocol, the recruitment, and base-line data for evaluating the success of randomisation of the PRO-AGE (PRevention in Older people-Assessment in GEneralists' practices) project. METHODS/DESIGN: A group of general practitioners (GPs) in London (U.K.), Hamburg (Germany) and Solothurn (Switzerland) were trained in risk identification, health promotion, and prevention in older people. Their non-disabled older patients were invited to participate in a randomised controlled study. Participants allocated to the intervention group were offered the Health Risk Appraisal for Older Persons (HRA-O) instrument with a site-specific method for reinforcement (London: physician reminders in electronic medical record; Hamburg: one group session or two preventive home visits; Solothurn: six-monthly preventive home visits over a two-year period). Participants allocated to the control group received usual care. At each site, an additional group of GPs did not receive the training, and their eligible patients were invited to participate in a concurrent comparison group. Primary outcomes are self-reported health behaviour and preventative care use at one-year follow-up. In Solothurn, an additional follow-up was conducted at two years. The number of older persons agreeing to participate (% of eligible persons) in the randomised controlled study was 2503 (66.0%) in London, 2580 (53.6%) in Hamburg, and 2284 (67.5%) in Solothurn. Base-line findings confirm that randomisation of participants was successful, with comparable characteristics between intervention and control groups. The number of persons (% of eligible) enrolled in the concurrent comparison group was 636 (48.8%) in London, 746 (35.7%) in Hamburg, and 1171 (63.0%) in Solothurn. DISCUSSION: PRO-AGE is the first large-scale randomised controlled trial of health risk appraisal for older people in Europe. Its results will inform about the effects of implementing HRA-O with different methods of reinforcement.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Health risk appraisal is a promising method for health promotion and prevention in older persons. The Health Risk Appraisal for the Elderly (HRA-E) developed in the U.S. has unique features but has not been tested outside the United States. METHODS: Based on the original HRA-E, we developed a scientifically updated and regionally adapted multilingual Health Risk Appraisal for Older Persons (HRA-O) instrument consisting of a self-administered questionnaire and software-generated feed-back reports. We evaluated the practicability and performance of the questionnaire in non-disabled community-dwelling older persons in London (U.K.) (N = 1090), Hamburg (Germany) (N = 804), and Solothurn (Switzerland) (N = 748) in a sub-sample of an international randomised controlled study. RESULTS: Over eighty percent of invited older persons returned the self-administered HRA-O questionnaire. Fair or poor self-perceived health status and older age were correlated with higher rates of non-return of the questionnaire. Older participants and those with lower educational levels reported more difficulty in completing the HRA-O questionnaire as compared to younger and higher educated persons. However, even among older participants and those with low educational level, more than 80% rated the questionnaire as easy to complete. Prevalence rates of risks for functional decline or problems were between 2% and 91% for the 19 HRA-O domains. Participants' intention to change health behaviour suggested that for some risk factors participants were in a pre-contemplation phase, having no short- or medium-term plans for change. Many participants perceived their health behaviour or preventative care uptake as optimal, despite indications of deficits according to the HRA-O based evaluation. CONCLUSION: The HRA-O questionnaire was highly accepted by a broad range of community-dwelling non-disabled persons. It identified a high number of risks and problems, and provided information on participants' intention to change health behaviour.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Pain is a common experience in later life. There is conflicting evidence of the prevalence, impact, and context of pain in older people. GPs are criticised for underestimating and under-treating pain. AIM: To assess the extent to which older people experience pain, and to explore relationships between self-reported pain and functional ability and depression. DESIGN OF STUDY: Secondary analysis of baseline data from a randomised controlled trial of health risk appraisal. SETTING: A total of 1090 community-dwelling non-disabled people aged 65 years and over were included in the study from three group practices in suburban London. METHOD: Main outcome measures were pain in the last 4 weeks and the impact of pain, measured using the 24-item Geriatric Pain Measure; depression symptoms captured using the 5-item Mental Health Inventory; social relationships measured using the 6-item Lubben Social Network Scale; Basic and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living and self-reported symptoms. RESULTS: Forty-five per cent of women and 34% of men reported pain in the previous 4 weeks. Pain experience appeared to be less in the 'oldest old': 27.5% of those aged 85 years and over reported pain compared with 38-53% of the 'younger old'. Those with arthritis were four times more likely to report pain. Pain had a profound impact on activities of daily living, but most of those reporting pain described their health as good or excellent. Although there was a significant association between the experience of pain and depressed mood, the majority of those reporting pain did not have depressed mood. CONCLUSION: A multidimensional approach to assessing pain is appropriate. Primary care practitioners should also assess the impact of pain on activities of daily living.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Social isolation is associated with poorer health, and is seen by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as one of the major issues facing the industrialised world. AIM: To explore the significance of social isolation in the older population for GPs and for service commissioners. DESIGN OF STUDY: Secondary analysis of baseline data from a randomised controlled trial of health risk appraisal. SETTING: A total of 2641 community-dwelling, non-disabled people aged 65 years and over in suburban London. METHOD: Demographic details, social network and risk for social isolation based on the 6-item Lubben Social Network Scale, measures of depressed mood, memory problems, numbers of chronic conditions, medication use, functional ability, self-reported use of medical services. RESULTS: More than 15% of the older age group were at risk of social isolation, and this risk increased with advancing age. In bivariate analyses risk of social isolation was associated with older age, education up to 16 years only, depressed mood and impaired memory, perceived fair or poor health, perceived difficulty with both basic and instrumental activities of daily living, diminishing functional ability, and fear of falling. Despite poorer health status, those at risk of social isolation did not appear to make greater use of medical services, nor were they at greater risk of hospital admission. Half of those who scored as at risk of social isolation lived with others. Multivariate analysis showed significant independent associations between risk of social isolation and depressed mood and living alone, and weak associations with male sex, impaired memory and perceived poor health. CONCLUSION: The risk of social isolation is elevated in older men, older persons who live alone, persons with mood or cognitive problems, but is not associated with greater use of services. These findings would not support population screening for individuals at risk of social isolation with a view to averting service use by timely intervention. Awareness of social isolation should trigger further assessment, and consideration of interventions to alleviate social isolation, treat depression or ameliorate cognitive impairment.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: In the UK, population screening for unmet need has failed to improve the health of older people. Attention is turning to interventions targeted at 'at-risk' groups. Living alone in later life is seen as a potential health risk, and older people living alone are thought to be an at-risk group worthy of further intervention. AIM: To explore the clinical significance of living alone and the epidemiology of lone status as an at-risk category, by investigating associations between lone status and health behaviours, health status, and service use, in non-disabled older people. Design of study: Secondary analysis of baseline data from a randomised controlled trial of health risk appraisal in older people. SETTING: Four group practices in suburban London. METHOD: Sixty per cent of 2641 community-dwelling non-disabled people aged 65 years and over registered at a practice agreed to participate in the study; 84% of these returned completed questionnaires. A third of this group, (n = 860, 33.1%) lived alone and two-thirds (n = 1741, 66.9%) lived with someone else. RESULTS: Those living alone were more likely to report fair or poor health, poor vision, difficulties in instrumental and basic activities of daily living, worse memory and mood, lower physical activity, poorer diet, worsening function, risk of social isolation, hazardous alcohol use, having no emergency carer, and multiple falls in the previous 12 months. After adjustment for age, sex, income, and educational attainment, living alone remained associated with multiple falls, functional impairment, poor diet, smoking status, risk of social isolation, and three self-reported chronic conditions: arthritis and/or rheumatism, glaucoma, and cataracts. CONCLUSION: Clinicians working with independently-living older people living alone should anticipate higher levels of disease and disability in these patients, and higher health and social risks, much of which will be due to older age, lower educational status, and female sex. Living alone itself appears to be associated with higher risks of falling, and constellations of pathologies, including visual loss and joint disorders. Targeted population screening using lone status may be useful in identifying older individuals at high risk of falling.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: there is inadequate evidence to support currently formulated NHS strategies to achieve health promotion and preventative care in older people through broad-based screening and assessment in primary care. The most extensively evaluated delivery instrument for this purpose is Health Risk Appraisal (HRA). This article describes a trial using HRA to evaluate the effect on health behaviour and preventative-care uptake in older people in NHS primary care. METHODS: a randomised controlled trial was undertaken in three London primary care group practices. Functionally independent community-dwelling patients older than 65 years (n = 2,503) received a self-administered Health Risk Appraisal for Older Persons (HRA-O) questionnaire leading to computer-generated individualised written feedback to participants and general practitioners (GPs), integrated into practice information-technology (IT) systems. All primary care staff received training in preventative health in older people. The main outcome measures were self-reported health behaviour and preventative care uptake at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: of 2,503 individuals randomised, 2,006 respondents (80.1%) (intervention, n = 940, control n = 1,066) were available for analysis. Intervention group respondents reported slightly higher pneumococcal vaccination uptake and equivocal improvement in physical activity levels compared with controls. No significant differences were observed for any other categories of health behaviour or preventative care measures at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: HRA-O implemented in this way resulted in minimal improvement of health behaviour or uptake of preventative care measures in older people. Supplementary reinforcement involving contact by health professionals with patients over and above routine clinical encounters may be a prerequisite to the effectiveness of IT-based delivery systems for health promotion in older people.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Although free eye testing is available in the UK from a nation-wide network of optometrists, there is evidence of unrecognised, tractable vision loss amongst older people. A recent review identified this unmet need as a priority for further investigation, highlighting the need to understand public perceptions of eye services and barriers to service access and utilisation. This paper aims to identify risk factors for (1) having poor vision and (2) not having had an eyesight check among community-dwelling older people without an established ophthalmological diagnosis. METHODS Secondary analysis of self-reported data from the ProAge trial. 1792 people without a known ophthalmological diagnosis were recruited from three group practices in London. RESULTS Almost two in ten people in this population of older individuals without known ophthalmological diagnoses had self-reported vision loss, and more than a third of them had not had an eye test in the previous twelve months. In this sample, those with limited education, depressed mood, need for help with instrumental and basic activities of daily living (IADLs and BADLs), and subjective memory complaints were at increased risk of fair or poor self-reported vision. Individuals with basic education only were at increased risk for not having had an eye test in the previous 12 months (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.17-1.98 p=0.002), as were those with no, or only one chronic condition (OR 1.850, 95% CI 1.382-2.477, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Self-reported poor vision in older people without ophthalmological diagnoses is associated with other functional losses, with no or only one chronic condition, and with depression. This pattern of disorders may be the basis for case finding in general practice. Low educational attainment is an independent determinant of not having had eye tests, as well as a factor associated with undiagnosed vision loss. There are other factors, not identified in this study, which determine uptake of eye testing in those with self-reported vision loss. Further exploration is needed to identify these factors and lead towards effective case finding.
Resumo:
We report the concentrations of 28 PAHs, 15 oxygenated PAHs (OPAHs) and 11 trace metals/metalloids (As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, Se, and Zn) in muscle and gut + gill tissues of demersal fishes (Drapane africana, Cynoglossus senegalensis and Pomadasys peroteti) from three locations along the coast of the Gulf of Guinea (Ghana). The concentrations of ∑ 28PAHs in muscle tissues averaged 192 ng g− 1 dw (range: 71–481 ng g− 1 dw) and were not statistically different between locations. The concentrations of ∑ 28 PAHs were higher in guts + gills than in muscles. The PAH composition pattern was dominated by low molecular weight compounds (naphthalene, alkyl-naphthalenes and phenanthrene). All fish tissues had benzo[a]pyrene concentrations lower than the EU limit for food safety. Excess cancer risk from consumption of some fish was higher than the guideline value of 1 × 10− 6. The concentrations of ∑ 15 OPAHs in fish muscles averaged 422 ng g− 1 dw (range: 28–1715 ng g− 1dw). The ∑ 15 OPAHs/∑ 16 US-EPA PAHs concentration ratio was > 1 in 68% of the fish muscles and 100% of guts + gills. The log-transformed concentrations of PAHs and OPAHs in muscles, guts + gills were significantly (p < 0.05) correlated with their octanol–water partitioning coefficients, strongly suggesting that equilibrium partitioning from water/sediment into fish tissue was the main mechanism of bioaccumulation. The trace metal concentrations in the fish tissues were in the medium range when compared to fish from other parts of the world. The concentrations of some trace metals (Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn) were higher in guts + gills than in muscle tissues. The target hazard quotients for metals were < 1 and did not indicate a danger to the local population. We conclude that the health risk arising from the consumption of the studied fish (due to their PAHs and trace metals content) is minimal.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Potentially avoidable risk factors continue to cause unnecessary disability and premature death in older people. Health risk assessment (HRA), a method successfully used in working-age populations, is a promising method for cost-effective health promotion and preventive care in older individuals, but the long-term effects of this approach are unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of an innovative approach to HRA and counselling in older individuals for health behaviours, preventive care, and long-term survival. METHODS AND FINDINGS This study was a pragmatic, single-centre randomised controlled clinical trial in community-dwelling individuals aged 65 y or older registered with one of 19 primary care physician (PCP) practices in a mixed rural and urban area in Switzerland. From November 2000 to January 2002, 874 participants were randomly allocated to the intervention and 1,410 to usual care. The intervention consisted of HRA based on self-administered questionnaires and individualised computer-generated feedback reports, combined with nurse and PCP counselling over a 2-y period. Primary outcomes were health behaviours and preventive care use at 2 y and all-cause mortality at 8 y. At baseline, participants in the intervention group had a mean ± standard deviation of 6.9 ± 3.7 risk factors (including unfavourable health behaviours, health and functional impairments, and social risk factors) and 4.3 ± 1.8 deficits in recommended preventive care. At 2 y, favourable health behaviours and use of preventive care were more frequent in the intervention than in the control group (based on z-statistics from generalised estimating equation models). For example, 70% compared to 62% were physically active (odds ratio 1.43, 95% CI 1.16-1.77, p = 0.001), and 66% compared to 59% had influenza vaccinations in the past year (odds ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.66, p = 0.005). At 8 y, based on an intention-to-treat analysis, the estimated proportion alive was 77.9% in the intervention and 72.8% in the control group, for an absolute mortality difference of 4.9% (95% CI 1.3%-8.5%, p = 0.009; based on z-test for risk difference). The hazard ratio of death comparing intervention with control was 0.79 (95% CI 0.66-0.94, p = 0.009; based on Wald test from Cox regression model), and the number needed to receive the intervention to prevent one death was 21 (95% CI 12-79). The main limitations of the study include the single-site study design, the use of a brief self-administered questionnaire for 2-y outcome data collection, the unavailability of other long-term outcome data (e.g., functional status, nursing home admissions), and the availability of long-term follow-up data on mortality for analysis only in 2014. CONCLUSIONS This is the first trial to our knowledge demonstrating that a collaborative care model of HRA in community-dwelling older people not only results in better health behaviours and increased use of recommended preventive care interventions, but also improves survival. The intervention tested in our study may serve as a model of how to implement a relatively low-cost but effective programme of disease prevention and health promotion in older individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN 28458424.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES: To validate the Probability of Repeated Admission (Pra) questionnaire, a widely used self-administered tool for predicting future healthcare use in older persons, in three European healthcare systems. DESIGN: Prospective study with 1-year follow-up. SETTING: Hamburg, Germany; London, United Kingdom; Canton of Solothurn, Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: Nine thousand seven hundred thirteen independently living community-dwelling people aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Self-administered eight-item Pra questionnaire at baseline. Self-reported number of hospital admissions and physician visits during 1 year of follow-up. RESULTS: In the combined sample, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) were 0.64 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.62-0.66) for the prediction of one or more hospital admissions and 0.68 (95% CI=0.66-0.69) for the prediction of more than six physician visits during the following year. AUCs were similar between sites. In comparison, prediction models based on a person's age and sex alone exhibited poor predictive validity (AUC