RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is used to thoroughly assess and identify complex healthcare problems among older adults. However, administration of CGA is time-consuming and labor intensive. A simple screening tool with the mnemonic "FIND-NEEDS" was developed to quickly identify common geriatric conditions. The present study was to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the FIND-NEEDS. METHODS: The participants comprised first-visiting older adults aged 65 years and above (and who were able to communicate by themselves or with the help of a caregiver) who were assessed (October to December, 2021) using the FIND-NEEDS and CGA at geriatric outpatient clinics of a tertiary, referred medical center. The FIND-NEEDS was examined for its criterion-related validity and compared with the CGA results. Two types of scoring (summed score and binary score) of FIND-NEEDS and CGA were analyzed using Spearman correlation, sensitivity and specificity, and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: The mean age of the 114 outpatients was 78.3 ± 7.6 years, and 79 (69.3%) were female. The internal consistency was excellent when using all FIND-NEEDS items, and was acceptable when using domain scores. Exploratory factor analysis showed that most of the FIND-NEEDS domain scores had factor loadings higher than 0.3. Intercorrelations of binary scores between domains of FIND-NEEDS and CGA showed most domains were moderately correlated. The overall correlation of summed scores between FIND-NEEDS and CGA was high. The FIND-NEEDS summed score was moderately correlated with CGA score (r = 0.494; p < 0.001), and the binary score showed excellent correlation (r = 0.944; p < 0.001). When using the CGA score as the gold standard, the FIND-NEEDS showed excellent AUC (0.950), sensitivity (1.00), and specificity (0.90). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that the FIND-NEEDS had acceptable clinimetric properties to screen for geriatric problems among older adults. Further in-depth assessment and care plan can then be conducted afterwards.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: The Flemish version of the Triage Risk Screening Tool (fTRST), derived from the Triage Risk Screening Tool for assessing risk of readmission to the emergency department, is increasingly used as a simple screening tool in oncology. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the fTRST in the context of elective surgical treatment for urologic cancer patients. Methods: We included 886 patients who underwent major urologic cancer surgery at our institution between 2020 and 2022 and underwent preoperative screening, including fTRST. We set the fTRST cutoff at 2 and used propensity score matching and multivariate regression analysis to assess how fTRST affected two postoperative outcomes: ambulation failure and delirium. Results: Of the 886 patients, 693 (78%) had an fTRST score <2, and 193 (22%) had an fTRST score ≥2 (high likelihood of frailty). After matching the groups by propensity scores, we compared the outcomes of 131 patients in each group. We found that the group with fTRST ≥2 had significantly higher rates of ambulation failure (15 vs. 11%, p = 0.03) and delirium (16 vs. 11%, p = 0.008) than the group with fTRST <2. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that fTRST score ≥2 was an independent risk factor for postoperative ambulation failure (odds ratio [OR] = 4.05, p = 0.02), along with age ≥75 years (OR = 6.62, p = 0.02), preoperative benzodiazepine medications (OR = 5.12, p = 0.01), and receiving radical cystectomy (OR = 9.30, p = 0.02). Similarly, for delirium, fTRST score ≥2 was an independent risk factor (OR = 2.88, p = 0.03), along with preoperative benzodiazepine medications (OR = 4.38, p = 0.002). Conclusion: The fTRST might be a screening tool with great potential for identifying patients at high risk for unfavorable postoperative outcomes in elective urologic cancer surgery.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Assessing frailty, in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients is key when choosing appropriate treatment. Optimal screening is challenging, as it should be feasible and should avoid over-referral for comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) This study aims to evaluate the association between geriatric assessment using a new two-step care pathway, referral to geriatrician and adverse outcomes. METHODS: This institutional retrospective analysis on a prospective cohort analysed the multimodal geriatric assessment (GA) of newly diagnosed HNC patients. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression was performed to study the association between the screening tests, and referral to the geriatrician for complete geriatric screening, and adverse outcomes. RESULTS: This study included 539 patients, of whom 276 were screened. Patients who underwent the GA, were significantly older and more often had advanced tumour stages compared to non-screened patients. Referral to the geriatrician was done for 30.8% of patients. Of the 130 patients who underwent surgery, 26/130 (20%) experienced clinically relevant postoperative complications. Of the 184 patients who underwent (radio)chemotherapy, 50/184 (27.2%) had clinically relevant treatment-related toxicity. Age, treatment intensity, polypharmacy and cognitive deficits, were independently associated with referral to geriatrician. A medium to high risk of malnutrition was independently associated with acute radiation induced toxicity and adverse outcomes in general. CONCLUSION: The current study showed a 30.8% referral rate for CGA by a geriatrician. Age, treatment intensity, cognitive deficits and polypharmacy were associated with higher rates of referral. Furthermore, nutritional status was found to be an important negative factor for adverse treatment outcomes, that requires attention.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has improved cancer treatment in recent years. Older and frail patients are frequently treated with ICIs, but since they have been underrepresented in previous clinical trials, the real impact of ICI in this patient group is not well defined. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for associations between geriatric impairments and treatment outcomes in older patients with advanced and metastatic cancer treated with ICIs. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science for relevant articles published before June 2022. Studies investigating the association between impairments in at least two geriatric domains and treatment outcome were considered eligible. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment using the QUIPS tool was performed independently by two investigators. RESULTS: A total of nine studies were included. Median sample size of the studies was 92 patients (interquartile range (IQR) 47-113), with a median of 26 frail patients (IQR 21-35). Five studies investigated disease-related and survival outcomes, and two of them found a statistically significant association between geriatric impairments and either survival or disease progression. Eight studies investigated toxicity outcomes, and two of them showed a statistically significant association between geriatric impairments and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Few studies suggested a relation between geriatric impairments and worse clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Only a few studies have investigated the association between geriatric impairments and treatment outcomes and these studies were small. Older patients with geriatric impairments seem to be more likely to experience irAEs, but larger studies that include frail patients and use geriatric screening tools are required to confirm this association. These studies will be essential to improve the development of specific strategies to deal with frail patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic options in oncology keep on expanding. Nonetheless, older adults are underrepresented in clinical trials and those enrolled often have a better health status than their average peers, resulting in a lack of representative evidence for this heterogenous population. The inclusion of older patients and a uniform categorization of "frailty" is becoming increasingly urgent. Standardized tools could contribute to the quality and comparability of clinical trials and facilitate clinical decisions. The aim of this literature review was to elaborate an overview of the use of geriatric evaluation (GE) methods in clinical cancer research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a literature review of the PubMed database. Clinical pharmacotherapy studies that applied or evaluated a clearly defined system for the GE of oncological patients were included. Data retrieved encompassed the applied GE method(s), cancer type(s), and pharmacotherapy investigated, the number of included patients, study type, year of publication, as well as the primary purpose of the GE. The GEs used most frequently were depicted in more depth. RESULTS: In this literature review, 103 publications were selected for inclusion. The biggest proportion of studies (36%, n = 34) used clearly defined, but not previously validated, GE methods (study-specific GE). Standardized GE methods encountered in at least five publications were the G8 screening test (applied in 18% of included studies, n = 17), the Balducci score (7%, n = 7), and a geriatric assessment based on Hurria (5%, n = 5). The primary purpose of GE was predominantly an appraisal of its potential role in pharmacotherapy optimization. The GE also served as baseline and outcome measure, inclusion/exclusion criterion, factor for stratified randomization, and to determine treatment allocation. DISCUSSION: The wide range of GE methods used across studies make direct comparisons difficult, and many methods are poorly characterized and/or not previously validated. The further inclusion of representative older patients in clinical trials combined with the use of a standardized GE could help clinicians in the decision-making process.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with cancer who are being considered for cancer surgery are heterogenous, with variation in their physical, mental, and social baselines and risk of postoperative complications. Due in part to the complex nature of this population, the optimal preoperative evaluation method is not clearly defined. In this study we investigated whether geriatric-8 (G8), a screening tool for older patients with cancer that determines the need for a full geriatric assessment, is suitable for assessing the risk of postoperative complications in this population being considered for surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies that enrolled older patients undergoing cancer surgery and compared prevalence of postoperative complications in G8 "high" (≥15) patients and G8 "low" (<15) patients were identified using PubMed and EMBASE. A meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the risk ratio of postoperative complication rate. Postoperative mortality was systematically reviewed. RESULTS: Eleven studies published between 2017 and 2022 were included in our analysis with a total of 2,691 older patients who underwent various types of cancer surgery and were characterized by their G8 scores: 1,255 G8 high (≥15) patients and 1,436 G8 low (<15) patients. G8 low patients had a significantly higher prevalence of postoperative complications than G8 high patients (risk ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.56 [1.18-2.07], p = 0.002, I2 = 79%). DISCUSSION: G8 can be an effective and efficient preoperative tool to assess risk of postoperative complications in older adults undergoing cancer surgery and identify potential need for further evaluation of an individual's risk with a comprehensive geriatric assessment.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Over 50 % of cancers occur in people aged 70 and older, and 60 % of all cancer deaths occur in this population. Cancer care for the older adult is complex related to comorbidities, age related changes and various social needs. They also may experience cognitive and physical limitations during their cancer journey. At Moffitt Cancer Center, 49 % of patients seen in clinic, in hospital, in diagnostic and procedure areas are 65 years of age and over. The purpose of this quality project was to craft age friendly cancer care utilizing the 4 Ms framework as a roadmap to enterprise spread at an NCI Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Each new patient to the Senior Adult Oncology Program receives geriatric screening with SAOP-3, Timed up and Go and asked, "what matters most". The SAOP-3 Geriatric screening tool includes domains for screening depression and cognitive impairment. High risk medications prompt a pharmacy consult for deprescribing opportunities. RESULTS: Since becoming recognized as an AFHS, the 4 M's have been implemented in all inpatient units at 2 hospitals and continue to spread to ambulatory clinics on 4 outpatient sites. Further enterprise spread totals over 5500 geriatric oncology patients were screened utilizing the SAOP-3 screening tool.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Cognitive impairment is poorly addressed in G8 screening. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the additional value of Mini-Cog© in urogeriatric patients concurrently screened by G8 scores. Methods: Seventy-four consecutive urogeriatric patients aged 75 and above were evaluated. All patients underwent G8 and Mini-Cog© screening. Patients with a G8 score above 14 were considered geriatric "healthy or fit". A Mini-Cog© from four to five points was considered inconspicuous in screening for cognitive impairment. The additional information of a Mini-Cog© screening during G8 screening was evaluated by looking at G8 "fit and healthy" patients who had conspicuous Mini-Cog© tests and vice versa. Additionally, the results of the neuropsychological subitem "E" of the G8 score were compared with the results of the Mini-Cog© screening. Results: The mean age of the patients was 83 y (min. 75-max. 102). Sixty-one of the patients were males, and 13 were females. Twenty-nine of the patients had a normal G8 score and were considered "healthy or fit", and 45 were not. Forty-three of the patients had an inconspicuous Mini-Cog©, and 31 had a conspicuous Mini-Cog© of less than four points. The majority of G8 "healthy or fit" patients (n = 24/29) had an inconspicuous Mini-Cog© test. However, of them, five patients had a Mini-Cog© of less than four points, which is suspicious for cognitive disorders. Furthermore, of the 43 patients with a normal G8 subscore in item "E" of two points, 6 patients had a conspicuous Mini-Cog© of less than four points. Conclusions: As shown by the present study, the Mini-Cog© might extend the G8 screening with regard to the detection of cognitive functional impairments that are not detected by the G8 screening alone. It can be easily added to G8 screening.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To study frailty screening in association with hospitalization and decline in quality of life (QoL) and functional status in older patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD). METHODS: A prospective multicentre cohort study in IBD patients ≥65 years using frailty screening (G8 Questionnaire). Outcomes were all-cause, acute and IBD-related hospitalization, any infection, any malignancy, QoL (EQ5D-3L) and functional decline (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, (IADL)) during 18 months follow-up. Confounders: age, IBD type, biochemical disease activity (C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/L and/or fecal calprotectin ≥250 µg/g), comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index). RESULTS: Out of 405 patients, median age 70 years, 196 (48%) screened at risk for frailty. All-cause hospitalizations occurred 136 times in 96 patients (23.7%), acute hospitalizations 103 times in 74 (18.3%). Risk of frailty did not associate with all-cause (aHR 1.5, 95% CI 0.9-2.4), but did associate with acute hospitalizations (aHR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3-3.8). Infections occurred in 86 patients (21.2%) and were not associated with frailty. Decline in QoL was experienced by 108 (30.6%) patients, decline in functional status by 46 (13.3%). Frailty screening associated with decline in QoL (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.6) and functional status (aOR 3.7, 95% CI 1.7-8.1). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty screening associates with worse health outcomes in older patients with IBD. Further studies are needed to assess feasibility and effectiveness of implementation in routine care.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: The G8 score is a widespread screening tool for geriatric frailty in oncology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the scores and relevance of G8 items in a standard screening of geriatric patients with uro-oncologic diseases to better understand the results of the assessment. METHODS: Eighty-two consecutive uro-oncologic geriatric patients aged 75 years and older were evaluated. All patients underwent a G8 screening that consisted of 8 items. Patients with a G8 score above 14 were considered geriatric "fit", while others were considered to be "frail". Overall results and single item scores were evaluated. Clinical data were gathered from patients' charts. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 82 years (min. 75-max. 102). In 36 of the patients, the G8 score indicated "no-frailty", and in 46 patients, the G8 score indicated "frailty". The mean G8 score was 12.9 (min 4-max 17 pts). Item analysis revealed that points were most often lost in items H (polypharmacy), P (comparison of health status to peers) and Age. Fifty-nine, 56 and 52 patients lost points on item Age, item H and item P, respectively. In contrast, the majority of patients reached the maximum score for nutritional items [i.e., items A (food intake), B (weight loss) and F (body mass index (BMI))]. For item A, 73 patients reached the maximum score; for item B, 62 patients reached the maximum score; and for item F, 72 patients reached the maximum score. There were no differences in this distribution pattern when comparing tumour entities, sex, and patients with local vs. metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: The present study revealed a high percentage of suspicious test results. Potential reasons for these findings include the low threshold of the G8 overall score and the fact that in some items, points were easily lost. Modifications of the test should be considered.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Frailty, an age-related condition of increased vulnerability to acute endogenous or exogenous stressors, is a key barrier to successful treatment of cancer in older people. In this group of patients, assessment of frailty is required before starting a new treatment. According to guidelines, the gold standard to assess frailty in older adults with cancer is geriatric screening followed by geriatric assessment (GA) across essential GA-domains (social status, physical function, nutrition, cognition, emotion, co-morbidity, polypharmacy). GA enables tailoring of both oncological therapy and non-oncological interventions to the patient's vulnerabilities. Large clinical trials recently have demonstrated that the feasibility and tolerability of systemic cancer treatment in older patients are significantly improved by such GA-guided management. Indications and optimal tools for frailty monitoring during the course of cancer treatment have not yet been defined in greater detail. New technologies such as wearable sensors or apps offer promising new opportunities to further develop frailty monitoring. This review describes the current standards and perspectives for the assessment and monitoring of frailty in elderly patients with cancer.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric screening and geriatric assessment (GS/GA) have proven their benefits in the care for older patients with cancer. However, less is known about the predictive value of GS/GA for outcomes. To research this, clinical data on GS/GA can be enriched with population-based data. In this article we describe the methods and feasibility of data linkage, and first clinical outcomes (GS/GA results and overall survival). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A large cohort study consisting of patients aged ≥70 years with a new cancer diagnosis was established using linked data from clinical and population-based databases. Clinical data were derived from a previous prospective study where older patients with cancer were screened with G8, followed by GA in case of an abnormal result (GS/GA study; 2009-2015). These data were linked to cancer registration data from the Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR), reimbursement data of the health insurance companies (InterMutualistic Agency, IMA), and hospital discharge data (Technical Cell, TCT). Cox regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the prognostic value of the G8 geriatric screening tool. RESULTS: Of the 8067 eligible patients with a new cancer diagnosis, linkage of data from the GS/GA study and data from the BCR was successful for 93.7%, resulting in a cohort of 7556 patients available for the current analysis. Further linkage with the IMA and TCT database resulted in a cohort of 7314 patients (96.8%). Based on G8 geriatric screening, 67.9% of the patients had a geriatric risk profile. Malnutrition and functional dependence were the most common GA-identified risk factors. An abnormal baseline G8 score (≤14/17) was associated with lower overall survival (adjusted HR [aHR] = 1.62 [1.50-1.75], p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Linking clinical and population-based databases for older patients with cancer has shown to be feasible. The GS/GA results at cancer diagnosis demonstrate the vulnerability of this population and the G8 score showed prognostic value for overall survival. The established cohort of almost 8000 patients with long-term follow-up will serve as a basis in the future for detailed analyses on long-term outcomes beyond survival.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Geriatric-specific characteristics influence patient-relevant outcomes of inpatient hospital care in patients aged 70 years and older: prolonged length of stay, complications, increase in utilization of required services as well as mortality rates. OBJECTIVE: The screening tool GeriNOT, identification of geriatric risk potential with 7 items, of which mobility and cognition are double-weighted, score 9 points, was tested for its predictive content and diagnostic quality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Diagnostic study from a retrospective, bicentric complete survey in all types of admission from 70 years with 2541 patient cases. Regression analyses in linked samples of the 7 items in GeriNOT and as noncombined end points: prolonged length of stay, complications, increase in need-based service at discharge and death. RESULTS: Mean age ± SD: 77.0 ± 6.4 years. ROC analyses report at a cut-off value calculated using the Youden index of ≥ 4 points in 2541 cases: increase in need-based service at discharge (AUC = 0.693, 95% CI = 0.663-0.723, sensitivity 75.2%, specificity 59.7%), complications (AUC = 0.662, 95% CI = 0.636-0.688, sensitivity 64.2%, specificity 61.6%) and death (AUC = 0.734, 95% CI = 0.682-0.786, sensitivity 76.4%, specificity 57.5%). Possibly suitable for use as screening to identify geriatric risk potentials at a cut-off of ≥ 4 points. DISCUSSION: Provide an initial filter screening with regard to mobility. Such identification could provide the involved persons with the opportunity for an improved treatment outcome by adapting the inpatient process. Prospective validation of GeriNOT needed.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the prognostic impact of various global health assessment tools in patients older than 60 years with ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: G-8 geriatric screening tool (G-8 score), Lee Schonberg prognostic index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were determined retrospectively in a consecutive cohort of elderly patients with OC. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses and Kaplan-Meier method were performed to analyze the impact of the preoperative global health status on survival. RESULTS: 116 patients entered the study. In multivariate analysis adjusted for clinical-pathological factors, only the G-8 score retained significance as a prognostic parameter of progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.970; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.056-3.677]; p = 0.033). Fifty-six patients were classified as G-8-nonfrail with an increased PFS compared to 50 G-8-frail patients (53.4% vs. 16.7%; p = 0.010). A higher CCI was associated with decreased PFS (45.1% vs. 22.2%; p = 0.012), but it did not influence the risk of recurrences or death (p = 0.360; p = 0.111). The Lee Schonberg prognostic index, the ECOG, and age were not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: The G-8 score independently predicted PFS in elderly OC patients regardless of maximal surgical effort. Thus, it could be useful to assess surgical treatment based on frailty rather than age alone.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Endometrial cancer is a common malignancy in elderly women that are more likely to suffer from limiting medical comorbidities. Given this narrower therapeutic ratio, we aimed to assess the oncologic outcomes and toxicity in the adjuvant setting. Out of a cohort of 975 women, seventy patients aged ≥ 80 years, treated with curative postoperative radiotherapy (RT) for endometrial cancer between 2005 and 2021, were identified. Outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier-analysis and comorbidities using the Charlson Comorbidity Index and G8 geriatric score. The overall survival at 1-, 2- and 5-years was 94.4%, 82.6%, and 67.6%, respectively, with significant correlation to G8 score. At 1- and 5-years, the local control rates were 89.5% and 89.5% and distant control rates were 86.3% and 66.9%, respectively. Severe (≥grade 3) acute toxicity was rare with gastrointestinal (2.9%), genitourinary (1.4%), and vaginal disorders (1.4%). Univariate analysis significantly revealed inferior overall survival with lower RT dose, G8 score, hemoglobin levels and obesity, while higher grading, lymphangiosis, RT dose decrease and the omission of chemotherapy reduced distant control. Despite older age and additional comorbidities, elderly patients tolerated curative treatment well. The vast majority completed treatment as planned with very low rates of acute severe side-effects. RT offers durable local control; however, late distant failure remains an issue.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The G8 and ISAR scores are two different screening tools for geriatric risk factors and frailty. The aim of this study was to compare the G8 and ISAR screening results in a cohort of urogeriatric patients to help clinicians to better understand and choose between the two tests. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 100 patients at the age of 75 and above who were treated for different urological conditions. All routinely and prospectively underwent G8 and ISAR screening tests. A G8 score ≤ 14 and an ISAR score > 2 were considered positive. The results for the two tests were compared and correlated to clinical data. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 83 y (min. 75-max. 101); 78 of the patients were male, while 22 were female; 58 of the patients were G8-positive, while 42 were G8-negative; and 24 were ISAR-positive, while 76 ISAR were negative. All the ISAR-positive patients were also G8-positive. There was a significant negative correlation between the G8 and ISAR scores (r = -0.77, p < 0.001). Both tests correlated significantly with the Charlson comorbidity index, length of stay, number of coded diagnosis, and Braden score (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both tests are significantly correlated with each other and to clinical data related to geriatric frailty. However, the G8 score has a much higher rate of positive tests, which limits its use in daily routine, and the ISAR score is therefore preferable. For "fit" geriatric patients, however, a negative G8 score can be of great use as a confirmatory test for further decision making.

RESUMEN

Geriatric emergency medicine has emerged as a subspecialty of emergency medicine over the past 25 years. This emergence has seen the development of increases in training opportunities, care delivery strategies, collaborative best practice guidelines, and formal geriatric emergency department accreditation. This multidisciplinary field remains ripe for continued development in the coming decades as the aging US population parallels a call from patients, health care providers, and health systems to improve the delivery of high-value care. This article educates emergency medicine practitioners and highlights high-value care practice trends to inform and prioritize decision-making for this unique patient population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objective Geriatric screening followed by a more detailed assessment and intervention is recommended for older adults with cancer. However, little is known regarding how the geriatric screening covered by Japanese health insurance is used for hospitalized older cancer patients. We surveyed all hospitals in Japanese Association of Clinical Cancer Centers (JACCC) to explore the current use of this approach. Methods The JACCC member hospitals specialize in cancer care from prevention, through diagnosis and treatment, to palliative care. We mailed paper questionnaires to the presidents of the hospitals in December 2019 and collected them by February 2020. The survey requested general hospital information and asked whether (and how) such geriatric screening for hospitalized older adults with cancer was conducted. Results Twenty-six of 32 hospitals completed the survey (81%). Fourteen hospitals are cancer centers, while the remaining 12 hospitals are general hospitals which care of both cancer and non-cancer patients. Eleven hospitals (42%) performed geriatric screening and the most common use of the results was for "early discharge planning" and for "applying for long-term care insurance." Most clinicians rated the screening "somewhat" or "a little" helpful and found it most helpful for "meeting patient-post discharge needs". The most frequently reported barrier to implementation was a "lack of leadership to improve the care of older adults." Conclusion Geriatric screening was used at less than half of the major cancer centers and hospitals in Japan. One feasible solution to this problem is to establish an interprofessional workgroup at each hospital with the shared goal of providing high-quality care for this population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Studies on the occurrence of ocular toxoplasmosis (OT) in a general population are rare. Therefore, we conducted this pilot study to assess whether a nonmydriatic ultra-wide-field (UWF) scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO) is suitable for a simple, rapid screening procedure. METHODS: The population of this cross-sectional study was randomly recruited from a cohort of hospital-based patients in an urban geriatric hospital. Ophthalmologic evaluation was performed on 201 eyes from 101 participants through nonmydriatic UWF-SLO (Optos Daytona) and assessed for suspicious lesions and other relevant ocular findings. All images were evaluated by two independent examiners. Individuals who presented lesions with a morphological appearance suggestive of OT underwent fundoscopy and serological analysis of Toxoplasma gondii-specific antibodies. RESULTS: The mean age of the study group was 76 years, and 63 (62%) were female. Despite many health restrictions, the SLO examination was carried out easily in this geriatric population. Three participants presented findings by SLO suspicious for T. gondii-related injury. Further clinical examination and serological investigation confirmed the diagnosis, with funduscopic evaluation and positive T. gondii ELISA testing. In addition, a high rate of arterial hypertension and dyslipidemias within the cohort led to a high incidence of vascular changes and age-related fundus findings. CONCLUSION: In our study, we confirm that UWF-SLO technology is helpful in the rapid detection of peripheral retinal injuries in elderly patients such as OT and may be used as a routine screening tool.

Asunto(s)