An evaluation of the comparative effectiveness of geriatrician-led comprehensive geriatric assessment for improving patient and healthcare system outcomes for older adults: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

被引:15
作者
Soobiah, Charlene [1 ,2 ]
Daly, Caitlin [3 ]
Blondal, Erik [1 ,2 ]
Ewusie, Joycelyne [3 ]
Ho, Joanne [4 ]
Elliott, Meghan J. [1 ,2 ]
Yue, Rossini [2 ]
Holroyd-Leduc, Jayna [5 ]
Liu, Barbara [6 ]
Marr, Sharon [7 ]
Basran, Jenny [8 ]
Tricco, Andrea C. [1 ,9 ]
Hamid, Jemila [1 ,3 ]
Straus, Sharon E. [1 ,10 ]
机构
[1] St Michaels Hosp, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Inst, 209 Victoria St,East Bldg,Room 716, Toronto, ON M5B 1T8, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, 155 Coll St,Suite 425, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada
[3] McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, 1280 Main St West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada
[4] Schlegel Res Inst Aging, 250 Laurelwood Dr, Waterloo, ON N2J 0E2, Canada
[5] Univ Calgary, Foothills Hosp, Dept Med, 11th Floor South Tower,Room 1103,1403-29 St NW, Calgary, AB T2N 2T9, Canada
[6] Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Reg Geriatr Program Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave,L Wing,1st Floor,Room L1-01D, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[7] McMaster Univ, Reg Geriatr Program Cent, 88 Maplewood, Hamilton, ON L8M 1W9, Canada
[8] Univ Saskatchewan, Dept Med, 701 Queen St, Saskatoon, SK S7K 0M7, Canada
[9] Univ Toronto, Dalla Lana Sch Publ Hlth, 155 Coll St,6th Floor, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada
[10] Univ Toronto, Dept Med, 200 Elizabeth St,Suite R Fraser Elliott 3-805, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4, Canada
关键词
Systematic review; Network meta-analysis; Comprehensive geriatric assessment; Geriatric care; Geriatric assessment; Integrated knowledge translation; SIMULATION; RELEVANCE; PEOPLE; TIME;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-017-0460-4
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is an integrated model of care involving a geriatrician and an interdisciplinary team and can prioritize and manage complex health needs of older adults with multimorbidity. CGAs differ across healthcare settings, ranging from shared care conducted in primary care settings to specialized inpatient units in acute care. Models of care involving geriatricians vary across healthcare settings, and it is unclear which CGA model is most effective. Our objective is to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine the comparative effectiveness of various geriatrician-led CGAs and to identify which models improve patient and healthcare system level outcomes. Methods: An integrated knowledge translation approach will be used and knowledge users (KUs) including patients, caregivers, geriatricians, and healthcare policymakers will be involved throughout the review. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Ageline will be searched from inception to November 2016 to identify relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials of older adults (>= 65 years of age) that examine geriatrician-led CGAs compared to any intervention will be included. Primary and secondary outcomes will be selected by KUs to ensure the results are relevant to their decision-making. Two reviewers will independently screen the search results, extract data, and assess risk of bias. Data will be synthesized using an NMA to allow for multiple comparisons using direct (head-to-head) as well as indirect evidence. Interventions will be ranked according to their effectiveness using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Discussion: As the proportion of older adults grows worldwide, the demand for specialized geriatric services that help manage complex health needs of older adults with multimorbidity will increase in many countries. Results from this systematic review and NMA will enhance decision-making and the efficient allocation of scarce geriatric resources. Moreover, active involvement of KUs throughout the review process will ensure the results are relevant to different levels of decision-making.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 42 条
  • [1] Andersen B, 2000, QUAL PROG, V33, P144
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2010, BMJ, DOI [DOI 10.1136/BMJ.C1718, 10.1136/bmj.c1718]
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2015, BUGS PROJECT WINBUGS
  • [4] [Anonymous], QUAL SURV SOFTW
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2015, The R Project for Statistical Computing. [Online]
  • [6] Canadian Medical Association, 2015, GER MED PROF
  • [7] Assessing the Sensitivity of Meta-analysis to Selection Bias: A Multiple Imputation Approach
    Carpenter, James
    Ruecker, Gerta
    Schwarzer, Guido
    [J]. BIOMETRICS, 2011, 67 (03) : 1066 - 1072
  • [8] A systematic review of comprehensive geriatric assessment to improve outcomes for frail older people being rapidly discharged from acute hospital: 'interface geriatrics'
    Conroy, Simon Paul
    Stevens, Tony
    Parker, Stuart G.
    Gladman, John R. F.
    [J]. AGE AND AGEING, 2011, 40 (04) : 436 - 443
  • [9] AN EXPERIMENTAL APPLICATION OF THE DELPHI METHOD TO THE USE OF EXPERTS
    DALKEY, N
    HELMER, O
    [J]. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1963, 9 (03) : 458 - 467
  • [10] Facilitating comparative effectiveness research in cancer genomics: evaluating stakeholder perceptions of the engagement process
    Deverka, Patricia A.
    Lavallee, Danielle C.
    Desai, Priyanka J.
    Armstrong, Joanne
    Gorman, Mark
    Hole-Curry, Leah
    O'Leary, James
    Ruffner, B. W.
    Watkins, John
    Veenstra, David L.
    Baker, Laurence H.
    Unger, Joseph M.
    Ramsey, Scott D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2012, 1 (04) : 359 - 370