Skip Navigation


Age and Ageing Advance Access originally published online on August 14, 2008
Age and Ageing 2008 37(6):647-652; doi:10.1093/ageing/afn161
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
37/6/647    most recent
afn161v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Piccoliori, G.
Right arrow Articles by Abholz, H.-H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Piccoliori, G.
Right arrow Articles by Abholz, H.-H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Geriatric assessment in general practice using a screening instrument: is it worth the effort? Results of a South Tyrol Study

Giuliano Piccoliori, Elena Gerolimon and Heinz-Harald Abholz

Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Abteilung für Allgemeinmedizin, Geb. 14.97, Moorenstr. 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany

Address correspondence to: Heinz-Harald Abholz. Tel: (+49)-211-8117771. Email: abholz{at}med.uni-duesseldorf.de

Background: geriatric assessment is a well-established instrument to improve the care of the elderly, but little is known about it in general practice although patients often are known for years.

Methods: we used STEP-assessment, an instrument developed by European General Practitioners (GPs), which identifies only problems that can be improved; 37 questions had to be answered by the patient and 4 tests had to be done by the GP. Additionally in the study, GP and patient had to indicate separately which of the problems were seen as relevant and what both accepted to do for improvement. A year later, participating GPs were asked by a not-announced questionnaire to report on improvements and reasons for failure.

Results: of the 220 eligible GPs, 45 enrolled a random sample of 894 patients (average age 77 years). In all 7.8 out of 32 possible problems per patient were found. Of those, 1.4 problems were not known to the GP. More than two-thirds of the ‘new problems’ are perceived as relevant by GP, patient or by both. GPs assessed medical problems and patients assessed social/psychological problems as more relevant. The length and quality of the relationship with the patient was reflected in the number of new problems, with fewer new problems in those well-known. A year later, GPs had offered treatment for 47% of the newly diagnosed problems, with a success-rate of 81%.

Conclusion: geriatric screening can detect unidentified problems in general practice. Once detected and dealt with, a high proportion of the undetected problems showed improvement. GPs focussed more on medical, while patients more on psychosocial issues. To increase the outcome of screening, it is necessary to discuss the relevance assessed by the patient.

Keywords: general practice, elderly, geriatric assessment, screening, follow-up study, elderly

Received 7 June 2007; accepted in revised form 3 March 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.