Geriatrisches Assessment – Welche Tests eignen sich für die Hausarztpraxis?

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Gesundheit der älteren Bevölkerung ist auffällig heterogen. Hausärzte müssen sich einen schnellen Überblick darüber verschaffen können, wer von einem körperlichen Abbau, funktionellen Einschränkungen und Abhängigkeit bedroht ist. Das geriatrische Assessment soll Hausärzte darin unterstützen, diese Unterscheidung vorzunehmen und eine individuelle bedürfnisgerechte Versorgung anzubahnen.

Der folgende Beitrag informiert über die ambulante Anwendung des geriatrischen Assessments und liefert eine kritische evidenzbasierte Diskussion zur Effektivität und zum diagnostischen Nutzen gebräuchlicher Testverfahren. In einem Ausblick wird auf aktuelle Entwicklungen zur Selektion vulnerabler Patienten und zu praxistauglichen Assessments hingewiesen.

Abstract

There is substantial variation in the health of the older population. Primary care physicians are in demand of a quick overview of their patients’ health in order to determine who is at risk of decline and dependency. A geriatric assessment aims to meet these requirements. Its intention is to facilitate care tailored to the individual needs.

The following article gives an account of how geriatric assessment is currently applied in primary care. It provides evidence as to its effectiveness and critically discusses the use of standard instruments. Currently, easy to administer instruments are being tested in primary care for targeting frail older people and assessing their needs.

• Literatur

• 1 Böhm K, Tesch-Römer C, Ziese T. Beiträge zur Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. Gesundheit und Krankheit im Alter. Berlin: Robert Koch-Institut; 2009
  Google Scholar
• 2 Sommeregger U. The multidimensional geriatric assessment. Z Gerontol Geriat 2013; 46: 277-286
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Hoffmann W. Assessment I – Von den Herausforderungen der Anfänge bis zu Aspekten zukünftiger Entwicklungen. Z Gerontol Geriat 2015. DOI: 10. 1007/s00391-015–0856–5
  Google Scholar
• 4 Rubenstein LZ, Wieland D. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. Ann Rev Gerontol Geriatrics 1989; 9: 134-192
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Finbarr M for the Policy Committee / British Geriatric Society. Comprehensive assessment of the frail older patient. www.bgs.org.uk/index.php/topresources/publicationfind/goodpractice/195-gpgcgassessment (letzter Zugriff 10. 09. 2015)
  Google Scholar
• 6 Ward K, Reuben D. Comprehensive geriatric assessment. www.uptodate.com/contents/comprehensive-geriatric-assessment (10. 09. 2015)
  Google Scholar
• 7 Warren M. Care of the chronic aged sick. Lancet 1946; 247: 841-843
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Stuck AE, Siu AL, Wieland GD et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet 1993; 342: 1032-1036
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Ellis G, Whitehead MA, O’Neill D et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital. Cochrane database Syst Rev 2011; (7): CD006211
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Bordne S, Schulz R-J, Zank S. Effects of inpatient geriatric interventions in a German geriatric hospital. Z Gerontol Geriat 2015; 48: 370-375
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Beswick AD, Rees K, Dieppe P et al. Complex interventions to improve physical function and maintain independent living in elderly people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2008; 371: 725-735
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Ernst F, Lübke N, Meinck M. Kompendium Begutachtungswissen Geriatrie. Berlin: Springer; 2015
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 13 Thode R, Rüschmann HH. Projekt Geriatrie des Landes Schleswig-Holstein. Wissenschaftliche Begleitforschung, Hrsg. Ministerium für Arbeit, Soziales, Jugend und Gesundheit des Landes Schleswig-Holstein MASJG, Kiel; 1995
  Google Scholar
• 14 Nikolaus T. Klinische Geriatrie. 1. Auflage. Berlin: Springer; 2000
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 15 Conroy SP, Stevens T, Parker SG et al. A systematic review of comprehensive geriatric assessment to improve outcomes for frail older people being rapidly discharged from acute hospital: ‘interface geriatrics’. Age Ageing 2011; 40: 436-443
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Hallberg IR, Kristensson J. Preventive home care of frail older people: a review of recent case management studies. J Clin Nurs 2004; 13: 112-120
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung Berlin. Online-Version des EbM. Stand 1.1.2016, http://www.kbv.de/html/online-ebm.php (letzter Zugriff 15.1.2016)
  Google Scholar
• 18 Thomas A. Der neue EBM: Geriatrisches Basisassessment erst ab 70 plus. www.medical-tribune.de/home/praxis-und-geld/abrechnung/artikeldetail/der-neue-ebm-geriatrisches-basisassessmenterst-ab-70-plus.html (letzter Zugriff 08. 09. 2015)
  Google Scholar
• 19 Lee L, Heckman G, Molnar FJ. Identifying elderly patients at high risk of poor outcomes. Can Fam Phys 2015; 61: 227-231
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Theile G, Winter A, Hummers-Pradier E et al. Das Geriatrische Basisassessment in der Hausarztpraxis. Z Gerontol Geriat 2012; 45: 323-332
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel Index. Md State Med J 1965; 14: 61-65
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Lübke N, Meinck M, Von Renteln-Kruse W. The Barthel Index in geriatrics. A context analysis for the Hamburg Classification Manual. Z Gerontol Geriat 2004; 37: 316-326
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Quinn TJ, Langhorne P, Stott DJ. Barthel Index for stroke trials: development, properties, and application. Stroke 2011; 42: 1146-1151
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Duffy L, Gajree S, Langhorne P et al. Reliability / inter-rater agreement of the Barthel Index for assessment of stroke survivors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2013; 44: 462-468
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Eichhorn-Kissel J, Datten T, Lohrmann C. Comparison of the responsiveness of the Care Dependency Scare for rehabilitation and the Barthel Index. Clin Rehabil 2011; 25: 760-767
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Kwon S, Hartzema A, Duncon P et al. Disability measures in stroke. Relationship among the Barthel Index, the Functional Independence Measures, and the Modified Rankin Scale. Stroke 2004; 35: 918-923
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 de Morton N, Keating J, Davidson M. Rasch analysis of the Barthel index in the assessment of hospitalized older patients after admission for an acute medical condition. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008; 89: 641-647
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Neal LJ. Current functional assessment tools. Home Healthc Nurse 1998; 16: 766-772
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Weimar C, Kurtz T, Kraywinkel K et al. Assessment of functioning and disability after ischemic stroke. Stroke 2002; 33: 2053-2059
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Sinoff G, Ore L. The Barthel Activities of Daily Living Index: self-reporting versus actual performance in the old-old (≤ 75 years). J Am Geriatr Soc 1997; 45: 832-836
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Hager K, Brecht M, Krause O, Grosse V. Influence of cognition on treatment outcome in geriatric patients. Association between MMSE and gain in activities of daily living. Z Gerontol Geriat 2014; 47: 379-384
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Sainsbury A, Seebass G, Bansal A et al. Reliability of the Barthel Index when used with older people. Age Ageing 2005; 34: 228-232
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: Self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969; 9: 179-185
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Bennel K, Dobson F, Hinman R. Measures of physical performance assessments: Self-Paced Walk Test (SPWT), Stair Climb Test (SCT), Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), Chair Stand Test (CST), Timed Up & Go (TUG), Sock Test, Lift and Carry Test (LCT), and Car Task. Arthritis Care Res 2011; 63 (Suppl 11:) S350-S370
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Schöne D, Wu S, Mikolaizak A et al. Discriminative ability and predictive validity of the timed up and go test in identifying older people who fall: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Ger Soc 2013; 61: 202-208
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Barry E, Galvin R, Keogh C et al. Is the Timed Up and Go test a useful predictor of risk of falls in community dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Geriatr 2014; 14: 14
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Nordin E, Lindelöf N, Rosendahl E et al. Prognostic validity of the Timed Up-and-Go test, a modified Get-Up-and-Go test, staff‘s global judgement and fall history in evaluating fall risk in residential care facilities. Age Ageing 2008; 37: 442-448
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Coll-Planas L, Kron M, Sander S et al. Accidental falls among community-dwelling older adults. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2006; 39: 277-282
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Deandrea S, Lucenteforte E, Bravi F et al. Risk factors for falls in community dwelling older people. A systematic review and metaanalysis. Epidemiol 2010; 21: 658-668
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Gassmann KG, Ruppert R Freiberger E for the IZG Study Group. Predictors for occasional and recurrent falls in community- dwelling older people. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2009; 42: 3-10
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 41 Junius-Walker U. Die systematische Krankheitserfassung und -bewertung bei älteren Menschen in Hausarztpraxen. Z Allg Med 2013; 89: 461-467
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Mainland B.J., Amodeo S, Shulman K. Multiple clock drawing scoring systems: simpler is better. Int J Geriat Psychiatry 2014; 29: 127-136
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 43 Pinto E, Peters R. Literature review of the Clock Drawing Test as a tool for cognitive screening. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2009; 27: 201-213
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 44 Fuchs A, Wiese B, Altiner A et al. Cued Recall and other cognitive tasks to facilitate dementia recognition in primary care. J Am Ger Soc 2012; 60: 130-135
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Ehreke L, Luck T, Luppa M et al. Clock Drawing Test – screening utility for mild cognitive impairment according to different scoring systems: results of the Leipzig Longitudinal Study of the Aged (LEILA 75+). Int Psychogeriatrics 2011; 23: 1592-1601
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psych Research 1975; 12: 189-198
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Frühwald T, Gosch M. Geriatrisches Assessment. In: Böhmer F, ed. Geriatrie – Der ältere Patient mit seinen Besonderheiten. Wien: Böhlau Verlag; 2008
  Google Scholar
• 48 Mitchell AJ. A meta-analysis of the accuracy of the mini-mental state examination in the detection of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. J Psychiatr Res 2009; 43: 411-431
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 49 De Lepeleire J, Heyrman J, Baro F, Buntinx F. A combination of tests for the diagnosis of dementia had a significant diagnostic value. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58: 217-225
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 50 Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Smailagic N, Roquéi Figuls M et al. Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for the detection of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Cochrane Database Sys Rev 2015; (Issue 3) Art. No.: CD010783
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 51 Dahlke AR, Curtis LM, Federman AD et al. The Mini Mental Status Exam as a surrogate measure of health literacy. J Gen Intern Med 2014; 29: 615-620
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 52 Sikkes S, van den Berg M, Kol D, de Lange-de Klerk E et al. How useful is the IQCODE for discriminating between Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment and subjective memory complaints?. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2010; 30: 411-416
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 53 Ehrensperger M, Berres M, Taylor K et al. Screening properties for the German IQCODE with a two-year time frame in MCI and early Alzheimer’s disease. Int Psychogeriatr 2010; 22: 91-100
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 54 Fernandez-Garrido J, Ruiz-Ros V, Buigues C et al. Clinical features of prefrail older individuals and emerging peripheral biomarkers: a systematic review. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2014; 59: 7-17
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 55 Cooper R, Kuh D, Hardy R. Objectively measured physical capability levels and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2010; 341: 4467
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 56 Barkhausen T, Junius-Walker U, Hummers-Pradier E, Mueller CA, Theile G. “It’s MAGIC” – development of a manageable geriatric assessment for general practice use. BMC Fam Pract 2015; 16: 4
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar