1999
DOI: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.1999.tb00693.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimising care of the hospitalised elderly. A literature review and suggestions for future research

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
(5 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The specific features of these interventions are patient education on specific issues, close follow-up, home monitoring, adjustment of medication and regular communication with clinical experts [44]. Therapeutic success in many instances rests more on effective patient targeting than on setting, intensity or duration of the interventions [45].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The specific features of these interventions are patient education on specific issues, close follow-up, home monitoring, adjustment of medication and regular communication with clinical experts [44]. Therapeutic success in many instances rests more on effective patient targeting than on setting, intensity or duration of the interventions [45].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The older people occupy around two-thirds of acute hospital beds and emergency admissions have been rising for several years [7]. The healthcare cost and the proportion of hospital bed days used by older people are likely to increase further due to ageing population [8].…”
Section: Impact Of Ageing On Hospitalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both components of this intervention (algorithms and review process) were designed to conform to the necessary components of geriatric care 22 and were developed in consultation with health professionals and consumers from within the project hospital, including two geriatricians (SJO), one clinical pharmacologist (GMS), two cardiologists, one general medicine clinician, one neurologist, three clinical pharmacists, one physiotherapist, one occupational therapist, one social worker, three GPs, and one consumer representative. Additionally, the intervention was subject to review by practitioners external to the project and the hospital, including a neurologist, a geriatrician, a visiting international clinician with research interests in this setting, and an independent consumer advocate.…”
Section: Design and Implementation Of The Review Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Opinions about warfarin therapy were elicited in the 39 patients who were deemed postreview to be eligible candidates for it (new and existing users). For those with mildly impaired cognition (MMSE score [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24], the opinion of the primary caregiver was also obtained. In general, patients and caregivers were reluctant to express a preference for any therapy.…”
Section: Patient Preferencesmentioning
confidence: 99%