BackgroundTo examine concurrent prevalence trends of chronic disease, impairment and disability among older adults.MethodsWe analyzed the 1998, 2004 and 2008 waves of the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative survey of older adults in the United States, and included 31,568 community dwelling adults aged 65 and over. Measurements include: prevalence of chronic diseases including hypertension, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer, chronic lung disease and arthritis; prevalence of impairments, including impairments of cognition, vision, hearing, mobility, and urinary incontinence; prevalence of disability, including activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs).ResultsThe proportion of older adults reporting no chronic disease decreased from 13.1% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 12.4%-13.8%) in 1998 to 7.8% (95% CI, 7.2%-8.4%) in 2008, whereas the proportion reporting 1 or more chronic diseases increased from 86.9% (95% CI, 86.2%-89.6%) in 1998 to 92.2% (95% CI, 91.6%-92.8%) in 2008. In addition, the proportion reporting 4 or more diseases increased from 11.7% (95% CI, 11.0%-12.4%) in 1998 to 17.4% (95% CI, 16.6%-18.2%) in 2008. The proportion of older adults reporting no impairments was 47.3% (95% CI, 46.3%-48.4%) in 1998 and 44.4% (95% CI, 43.3%-45.5%) in 2008, whereas the proportion of respondents reporting 3 or more was 7.2% (95% CI, 6.7%-7.7%) in 1998 and 7.3% (95% CI, 6.8%-7.9%) in 2008. The proportion of older adults reporting any ADL or IADL disability was 26.3% (95% CI, 25.4%-27.2%) in 1998 and 25.4% (95% CI, 24.5%-26.3%) in 2008.ConclusionsMultiple chronic disease is increasingly prevalent among older U.S. adults, whereas the prevalence of impairment and disability, while substantial, remain stable.
Severe COPD was associated with lower cognitive performance on standardized measurement over time.
Background Older adult delirium is often unrecognized in the emergency department (ED), yet the most compelling research questions to overcome knowledge‐to‐practice deficits remain undefined. The Geriatric Emergency care Applied Research (GEAR) Network was organized to identify and prioritize delirium clinical questions. Methods GEAR identified and engaged 49 transdisciplinary stakeholders including emergency physicians, geriatricians, nurses, social workers, pharmacists, and patient advocates. Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses for Scoping Reviews, clinical questions were derived, medical librarian electronic searches were conducted, and applicable research evidence was synthesized for ED delirium detection, prevention, and management. The scoping review served as the foundation for a consensus conference to identify the highest priority research foci. Results In the scoping review, 27 delirium detection “instruments” were described in 48 ED studies and used variable criterion standards with the result of delirium prevalence ranging from 6% to 38%. Clinician gestalt was the most common “instrument” evaluated with sensitivity ranging from 0% to 81% and specificity from 65% to 100%. For delirium management, 15 relevant studies were identified, including one randomized controlled trial. Some intervention studies targeted clinicians via education and others used clinical pathways. Three medications were evaluated to reduce or prevent ED delirium. No intervention consistently prevented or treated delirium. After reviewing the scoping review results, the GEAR stakeholders identified ED delirium prevention interventions not reliant on additional nurse or physician effort as the highest priority research. Conclusions Transdisciplinary stakeholders prioritize ED delirium prevention studies that are not reliant on health care worker tasks instead of alternative research directions such as defining etiologic delirium phenotypes to target prevention or intervention strategies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.