Impacts of Geriatric Evaluation and Management Programs on Defined Outcomes: Overview of the Evidence
- 1 September 1991
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Vol. 39 (S1) , 8S-16S
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb05927.x
Abstract
Comprehensive geriatric assessment is a technique for multidimensional diagnosis of frail elderly people with the purpose of planning and/or delivering medical, psychosocial, and rehabilitative care. When comprehensive geriatric assessment is coupled with some therapy, then the term geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) will be used. Following a brief history of comprehensive geriatric assessment, we describe the varied patterns of GEM program organization and review the literature of studies examining GEM effectiveness. Program diversity complicates drawing firm conclusions about GEM effects; however, the vast majority of studies report positive, if not uniformly significant, results. Our analysis suggests that much of the variability in findings is due to sample size limitationsIn order to reach conclusions of program effects across studies and to avoid problems of small sample sizes, we undertook a formal meta‐analysis. In this initial meta‐analysis, we sought to evaluate the effect of GEM programs on a single outcome: mortality. We pooled all published GEM controlled trials into four major groups: inpatient consultation services, inpatient GEM units, home assessment services, and outpatient GEM programs. Meta‐analysis of 6‐month mortality demonstrates a 39% reduction of mortality for inpatient consultation services (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.46–0.81, P = 0.0008) and a 37% reduction of mortality for inpatient GEM units (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.42–0.93, P = 0.02). Home assessment services reduced mortality by 29% (odds ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.55–0.90, P = 0.005). On the other hand, no significant survival effect was found for outpatient GEM programs (odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.61–1.49). Further use of meta‐analytic techniques should be employed to clarify the effect of GEM on other important outcomes (eg, functional status, use of hospitals and nursing homes) as well as to identify program characteristics most effective in achieving these benefits.Keywords
This publication has 61 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Randomized, Controlled Trial of a Geriatric Assessment Unit in a Community Rehabilitation HospitalNew England Journal of Medicine, 1990
- Prospective randomised study of an orthopaedic geriatric inpatient service.BMJ, 1988
- Effectiveness of geriatric rehabilitative care after fractures of the proximal femur in elderly women: a randomised clinical trial.BMJ, 1988
- Secondary prevention of vascular disease by prolonged antiplatelet treatmentBMJ, 1988
- A Model of Interdisciplinary Ambulatory Geriatric Care in a Veterans Administration Medical CenterThe Gerontologist, 1986
- Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trialsProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 1985
- Effectiveness of a Geriatric Evaluation UnitNew England Journal of Medicine, 1984
- Contribution from geriatric medicine within acute medical wards.BMJ, 1979
- MEDICAL SCREENING OF OLD PEOPLE ACCEPTED FOR RESIDENTIAL CAREThe Lancet, 1978
- OLD PEOPLE AT HOME THEIR UNREPORTED NEEDSThe Lancet, 1964