Objective: To quantify the medical component of assessing and restoring function in the elderly and to determine if a subset who did not require medical input could be identified.
Design: Prospective consecutive sample.
Setting: Inpatient assessment, treatment and rehabilitation unit for the elderly in New Zealand.
Patients: Two hundred patients aged 60-98 years.
Main outcome measures: (1) Proportion of elderly people receiving rehabilitation who also required treatment of medical problems. (2) Characteristics of those not requiring medical input.
Results: One hundred and seventy-two (86%) of people required some medical input during their hospital stay for rehabilitation. Forty-nine per cent had medical conditions which had a direct impact on their rehabilitation. Rehabilitation was delayed for a mean 16.8 (13.0-20.6)% of hospital stay when significant medical problems required treatment. People with previously undiagnosed conditions affecting rehabilitation tended to be older. The referral diagnoses most likely to result in an uncomplicated inpatient stay (i.e. rehabilitation only or rehabilitation with treatment of minor medical problems) were postsurgical treatment (55% uncomplicated), stroke (47% uncomplicated) or amputation (55% uncomplicated). However, 45-53% of people with these problems had a major medical component to their stay. People with other referral diagnoses or those admitted from institutions for the elderly were more likely to have a medical component to their stay.
Conclusion: Restoration of function in the elderly requires a combination of both medical and rehabilitation skills. Reliable predictors of those not requiring medical input could not be found.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Stuck AE, Siu AL, Wieland GD, Adams J., Rubenstein LZComprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet1993; 342: 1032-36.
2.
Wilkinson TJ , Sainsbury R.Elderly people referred for institutional care - is prior assessment necessary?NZ Med J1992; 105: 451-52.
3.
Moore TJHabilitation and rehabilitation in New Zealand. Wellington : Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation and National Advisory Committee on Core Health and Disability Support Services, 1995.
4.
Siegler EL, Stineman MG, Maislin G.Development of complications during rehabilitation. Arch Intern Med1994; 154: 2185-90.
5.
Bernardini B. , Meinecke C., Pagani M. et al. Comorbidity and adverse clinical events in the rehabilitation of older adults after hip fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc1995; 43: 894-98.
6.
Parry F.Physical rehabilitation of the old, old patient. J Am Geriatr Soc1983; 31: 482-84.
7.
Feigenson JS , McCarthy ML, Greenberg SD, Feigenson WDFactors influencing outcome and length of stay in a stroke rehabilitation unit, II. Stroke1977; 8: 657-62.
8.
Felsenthal G. , Cohen BS, Hilton EB, Panagos AV, Aiken BMThe physiatrist as primary physician for patients on an inpatient rehabilitation unit. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1984; 65: 375-78.
9.
Irvine RERehabilitation in geriatric orthopaedics. IntRehabil Med1985; 7: 115-20.
10.
Fairweather DS, Campbell AJThe effects of multiple aetiology and the degradation of information in old age. J R Coll Physicians Lond1991; 25: 105-109.
11.
Shipley J., Upton S.Support for independence for people with disabilities. Wellington: New Zealand Government, 1992.
12.
Landefeld CS , Palmer RM, Kresevic DM, Fortinsky RH, Kowal J.A randomized trial of care in a hospital medical unit especially designed to improve the functional outcomes of acutely ill older patients. N Engl J Med1995; 332: 1338-44.
