Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Older adults living with frailty and multimorbidity interact with multiple care providers and health settings, resulting in fragmented care and information discontinuity. Standardized assessments potentiate integrated care by communicating consistent measures of health information between sectors and providers. We use a pragmatic case example of a theoretical medically complex older adult to illustrate use of interRAI standardized assessments throughout the health journey. The case example represents the assessment findings of a patient accessing care through primary care, the emergency department, home/community care and long-term care. A suite of assessment instruments embedded with decision support algorithms guides nursing care decisions, while a common language and standardized assessment items support effective communication and collaboration among the health team. Successful adoption of integrated and comprehensive assessment tools requires training, engagement, and time to embed processes into practice. interRAI assessments enable integration through a common language, aligning successive assessments across the care continuum.

Introduction

Older adults with multimorbidity have complex health and social support needs, often requiring care across multiple settings.^1,2 This population has high rates of health instability, frailty, functional and cognitive impairment.³ Older adults also interact with multiple providers across care sectors, creating challenges for care continuity.^4,5 Health information sharing across clinical settings is essential to support care integration, health system performance and improved patient outcomes.^6,7 However, the typical organization and housing of health records within physical locations (e.g., hospitals, primary care offices) and health sectors (e.g., acute care) are fragmented, inhibiting accessibility and timely information transfer.^8,9 Even when health information is shared, use of different assessment, documentation, and care planning tools creates barriers to interpretation and application by providers.¹⁰ Inaccessible historical information results in workforce inefficiencies, including duplication of assessments and diagnostic tests.¹¹

Standardized assessments are designed to facilitate care integration, reduce assessment duplication, and support continuity of care. Informational continuity is enhanced when the chronological nature of patient information, interprofessional workforce use of information, digital and nomenclature language consistency, and interoperability of information are considered.^9,12,13 Standardized health assessments have the potential to ensure access to pertinent clinical history, including pre-morbid syndromes, diagnostic investigations, social needs, patient care goals and tailored care plans,^6,14 so that providers can see temporal changes in assessment data.

This article aims to provide an overview of how a standardized approach to assessment, documentation, and care planning, when championed by effective leadership, can benefit clinical decision-making, enhance interprofessional collaboration, and facilitate shared decision-making with persons across health settings from a Canadian nursing perspective.

Description of Care Practice: Intersectoral Approach to Assessment

These assessments can be completed by health professionals (e.g., nurses, social workers, therapists), making them ideal for interprofessional communication across health settings. The interRAI suite of instruments spans the age continuum, from pediatrics to geriatrics, and is designed to be used across diverse care settings.¹⁵ A common core set of approximately 70 items shared between all instruments ensures compatibility across care settings.¹⁵ The suite of instruments support identification of patient needs, strengths, and preferences, to facilitate proactive development of individualized care plans and referrals or consultations.¹⁶

Table 1 provides a summary of assessment instruments to be discussed. Embedded in interRAI assessments systems are decision support tools, calculated from assessment items, which measure the extent of a clinical issue or assess risk of adverse events. We will highlight the clinical utility of a subset of these tools by focusing on select risk algorithms, scales, and Clinical Assessment Protocols (CAPs) (Table 2). interRAI assessments are stored electronically, allowing CAPs, scales and algorithms to be generated automatically and available in real-time.

Table 1.

interRAI Instruments Used in Case Example

interRAI assessment instrument	Description
interRAI check-up (CU) Self-Report¹⁷	Self-reported comprehensive assessment used in various settings such as primary care, community support organizations and retirement homes. Designed to assess the needs of and support service planning for persons living in community settings
interRAI ED screener (also known as the assessment urgency Algorithm)¹⁸	Clinician-led screener used in the emergency department. Complements usual emergency department triage for older adults to determine need for geriatric assessment
interRAI ED contact assessment¹⁹	Brief clinician-led assessment used in the emergency department. Designed to identify geriatric syndromes and need for referral to geriatric services
RAI home care\|interRAI Home Care (HC)²⁰	Clinician-led comprehensive assessment used in home care. Completed on admission, at regular reassessment intervals and when health status changes. Designed to assess client preferences, strengths, and needs to guide care planning and service allocation
RAI MDS 2.0\|interRAI Long Term Care Facility (LTCF)²¹	Clinician-led comprehensive assessment used in long term care facilities. Completed at admission, at regular reassessment intervals, and when health status changes. Designed to assess resident preferences, strengths, and needs and generate a person-centred care plan

Table 2.

interRAI Outputs Used in Case Example

Algorithms and scales	Description
AUA¹⁸ Assessment urgency algorithm	Used to assess the person’s need or urgency for a comprehensive assessment and community services. Scale scores range from 1 (least urgent) to 6 (most urgent), with higher scores indicating higher priority for assessment
CHESS²² Changes in health, end-stage disease, signs, and symptoms scale	Used to measure medical complexity and health instability. Scale scores range from 0 (no health instability) to 5 (very high health instability), with higher scores indicating increasing levels of health instability
CPS²³ Cognitive performance scale	Used to measure cognitive performance. Scale scores range from 0 (intact) to 6 (very severe impairment), with higher scores indicating a higher degree of cognitive impairment
DIVERT²⁴ The detection of indicators and vulnerabilities for emergency room trips	Used to identify an individual’s likelihood of future unplanned emergency room visits. Scale scores range from 1 (lowest risk) to 6 (highest risk), with higher scores indicating higher risk for a future unplanned emergency department visit
ADL hierarchy²⁵	Used to measure functional performance in personal hygiene, toileting, locomotion and eating. Scale scores range from 0 (independent) to 6 (total dependence), with higher scores indicating greater decline in activities of daily living performance
MaPLE²⁶ Method for assigning priority levels	Used to identify those at risk for adverse outcomes such as admission to long-term care and to prioritize community or facility-based service allocation. Scale scores range from 1 (low) to 5 (very high), with higher scores indicating higher care needs
CaRE²⁷ Caregiver risk evaluation	Used to assess risk of caregiver burden in home care. Scale scores range from 1 (low) to 4 (very high), with higher scores indicating higher risk for caregiver burden
CAPs²¹ Clinical assessment protocols	Used to support decision-making and prioritization in care planning. CAPs include a description of the problem, goals of care, guidelines and additional resources. Protocols are generated for several conditions with recommendations to facilitate improvement or prevent decline (e.g., falls, cardiorespiratory conditions, pain)

A narrative review of the literature with a theoretical case example is used to describe the health journey of an older adult (Robert) with medical complexity, where nurses leverage interRAI standardized assessments to support continuity of care (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Robert’s Story

interRAI Check-Up Self-Report: Robert is Seen in Primary Care

Primary care supports older adults with multiple chronic conditions by coordinating their care with various specialists.²⁸ However, primary care providers report feeling overwhelmed by the complex needs of these patients and lack time and resources to help them navigate the health system effectively.²⁸ Using the interRAI Check-Up Self-Report (CU), older adults and their care partners can document health concerns before their appointments, increasing autonomy and engagement in care, while allowing more time to address concerns during in-person appointments.^29,30 The CU outputs act as a problem list identifying which issues to focus on, thus saving time.

An example of how the CU can be used to support primary care practice is seen in the Complex Care Program of a Family Health Team in Ontario, Canada, where the interRAI Check-Up was implemented to improve care of older adults living with complex needs related to frailty.³¹ This shared care interprofessional Nurse Practitioner (NP) led model includes a geriatrician embedded within the primary care team. The Assessment Urgency Algorithm (AUA) is used to screen all rostered older adults and identify those requiring comprehensive assessment. For patients with high AUA scores (5 or 6) the CU is completed with the caregiver, assessment findings inform team interventions and/or referrals for further management. Patients with the highest scores are prioritized to see the team and approximately 2/3 of these patients will see the Geriatrician. For example, a high CHESS score and diagnosis of an unstable chronic condition, such as heart failure, the plan may include medication review, diagnostic tests, and regular follow-up until the exacerbation is resolved. For those who do not require an urgent clinician assessment but are experiencing other concerns, such as loneliness, the NP shares information and facilitates access to socialization programs and community resources.

Emergency Department Assessment System: Robert Visits the Emergency Department

Older adults commonly present with complex medical diagnoses and psychosocial histories, which can be challenging for Emergency Departments (EDs) to manage when care needs change.^32-35 Older adults and those receiving home or Long-Term Care (LTC) are known to have greater ED visitation rates, hospital admissions, and worse health outcomes, both in the ED and post-discharge.^36,37 The interRAI ED Assessment System is a clinical decision support tool which is prognostic of important outcomes, including mortality, length of hospital stay, and the need for new or additional support services following discharge.^18,38,39 The system includes two elements: the AUA screener and a rapid geriatric assessment - the interRAI ED Contact Assessment (interRAI ED-CA). Together, they support identification of geriatric syndromes and the need for geriatrician referral, thereby allowing for interventions to improve outcomes.^40-43

The AUA adds approximately 1 minute to usual triage times.¹⁸ As seen in the case, the AUA score of 6 is used to determine that Robert required a rapid geriatric assessment with the interRAI ED-CA.⁴⁴ This instrument supports evaluation of a series of health domains, including physical function, cognitive performance, comprehension, mood, falls, nutritional status and symptomology (e.g., pain, dyspnea).¹⁸ Nurses can use information to identify geriatric syndromes (e.g., falls or urinary incontinence) or other health concerns, supporting appropriate support services referrals (e.g., memory or falls clinic) as part of the discharge plan.^39,40

Home Care Assessment System: Robert Receives Home Care Supports

In Canada, a small but growing proportion of care has been provided by hospital-to-home transitional care programs, which utilize interRAI tools.^45-47 Hospital-to-home programs offer short-term intensive care to help patients with complex conditions transition home, with an aim to reduce readmissions and ED visits.^48,49 Older adults receiving home care services are more likely to have cognitive impairment and functional dependency.³³ Therefore, routine assessments, after hospitalization or with treatment changes, are crucial to support successful aging in place.

In the hospital, the interRAI Contact Assessment (CA) is completed by the transitional care nurse to determine the patient’s discharge plan of care.³⁸ Once at home, the interRAI Home Care (HC) is completed, outputs from the assessment (see Table 2), and clinical judgement are used to develop the care plan and service needs. Decision support tools are used to prompt advanced care planning, including the DIVERT scale, Method for Assessing Priority Levels (MAPLe) and CaRE algorithms.^24,26,27 The DIVERT scale identifies the likelihood of future unplanned ED visits and can be used to target nursing interventions.⁴⁹ For example, a DIVERT score of 5 and heart failure symptoms suggest Robert would benefit from self-care support and education. A pilot project using the DIVERT Scale and nurse-led intervention for cardiorespiratory symptoms reduced emergency visits by 20% over the 7-month, prompting broader adoption in home care.^49,50 Other decision support tools such as the MAPLe and CaRE score assess caregiver burden, prompting discussions about future planning and need for long-term care. Identification of caregiver burden enables clinicians to investigate its underlying causes and initiate appropriate resources and services, including respite care and adult day programs.

Long-Term Care Transitioning Robert to Ensure Well-Being and Comfort

While most older adults prefer to age at home, the proportion of people living in collective dwellings, such as LTC homes, increases from 1 in 5 among the 85-89 age group to more than half of centenarians.⁵¹ Care provided in LTC requires careful and tailored assessment and care planning to adapt to the changing care needs of the individual.⁵² Within LTC, the interRAI Long Term Care Facilities or its legacy instrument, the Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS 2.0), are used to conduct assessments.⁵³ Upon completion, CAPs are generated (e.g., pain, pressure ulcers, and cardiorespiratory conditions). CAPs provide potential underlying causes of the issue and guidance for problem resolution to reduce risk for further decline.^20,54

The assessment is completed by a nurse upon admission to LTC, repeated quarterly, and as needed with clinical status changes.⁵⁵ Assessment information is used by nursing staff to identify resident risk factors, support decision making and care planning.⁵⁶ Over successive assessments, nurses note changes in scores and CAPs and respond with appropriate care planning adjustments. For Robert, a high CHESS score along with Pain and Cardiorespiratory Conditions CAPs prompts end-of-life discussions that include comfort and pain management strategies. From a quality perspective, the data support home and system quality improvement initiatives, such as benchmarking and monitoring inappropriate use of antipsychotic medications.^21,57

Discussion

Standardized and comprehensive interRAI assessment tools offer interoperability and improve care efficiencies at the person and system levels. This case example highlights for health leaders the feasibility and practicality of interRAI instruments for case finding, care planning, collaboration, and continuity of communication. Workflow efficiencies and individual health patterns are demonstrated through the comparison of pre-morbid and standardized health data tracked over time.

Patient-Level Efficiencies

In our illustration, we demonstrate the benefits of using a standardized assessment instrument, including identifying cognitive, cardiorespiratory, and functional changes over time, along with caregiver needs. When interRAI instruments are used, patients and families report feeling connected in their care,⁵⁸ confident that their needs are communicated to and between providers⁵⁹ and incorporated into goal-oriented plans of care.⁶⁰ Changes in risk scores and associated health states enable clinicians to take proactive measures and systematically allocate time and resources.⁵³ Reliable assessment tools and shared language of critical findings, such as deterioration, can support clinician collaboration and shared understanding of the severity of conditions or concerns.⁴³ Decision support features can aid in managing and monitoring chronic conditions in real-time, thus improving patient-specific interventions and case management.⁶¹ Our clinical illustration of interRAI risk algorithms and their use demonstrates their utility and timely decision-support.

Optimal clinical use of interRAI instruments has not yet been realized across care settings.^61,62 With appropriate education and practice support, interRAI assessments can reduce duplication of assessment and allow more time to discuss patient and caregiver concerns.^11,62-64 However, negative provider perceptions of the tool as an “administrative task”, taking time from direct clinical care, can prevail in settings where clinical utility of the instrument is not emphasized and feedback regarding assessment data is not shared with clinical staff.^62,65 For some clinicians, moving from discipline-specific assessments to a shared assessment results in uncertainty regarding professional responsibility and role, however the impact on patient care potentially outweighs this adjustment.^66,67 The benefit at the patient level must be realized by clinicians, to support implementation of standardized assessments such as interRAI. Improved patient outcomes have been demonstrated post-implementation, including reduced hospital admissions and improved functional outcomes.^14,68,69

Optimizing Interprofessional and Sectoral Integration

The case demonstrates standardized assessment tools that function cohesively as a system of intersectoral communication.¹⁰ This ensures that the continuance of care is consistently measured using a shared language.⁴³ Workforce collaboration can further support positive patient outcomes,^61,70 through referrals and the transfer of assessment information across health sectors. interRAI standardized assessments can support multidisciplinary models of care in home care,^26,27 and palliative care⁵⁹ settings. For example, a novel project of an interprofessional model of care, led by a primary care NP, used the Check-Up with patients awaiting geriatrician consultation to prioritize those at the greatest risk for poor outcomes. This approach expedited geriatric-sensitive interventions by the NP, such as medication reconciliation, referral to community support services and resulted in a 50% reduction in ED visits.⁷¹

interRAI assessments used in community-dwelling and LTC populations have improved the allocation of health resources, nursing care, and the initiation of referrals to interprofessional team members.^14,68,72 To successfully implement a system like interRAI on a large scale, it is essential to have patient, clinician and leadership engagement and system infrastructure for sustainable adoption.⁷³ Limited interoperability between the electronic health record and software to administer the interRAI instruments in a manner that aligns with the workflow of clinicians can threaten successful adoption.⁶⁵ From a health system leadership perspective, using a standardized electronic assessment can improve processes, streamline training and optimize health resources when assessment outcomes are integrated into continuous quality improvement processes.^74,75

Nursing Workforce and Impact

Our case example demonstrates how nurses can enhance daily care, assessment, and documentation by fully utilizing the interRAI assessment suite. This approach reduces the risk of duplicated documentation and supports efficient and effective use of information, adhering to the principle of ‘collect once, use many times’.^76,77

Healthcare settings can evaluate care policies using nurse-sensitive outcomes like preventable hospitalizations and preventable complications (delirium, pressure injuries, urinary tract infections, pneumonia).^78-80 However, accessing and utilizing data for secondary analysis has been challenging.^81,82 The absence of nursing care components in population health work has hindered adoption.^83,84 interRAI instruments, which focus on function, cognition and activities of daily living (the core targets of nursing practice), offer a comprehensive framework for continuous quality improvement and research on nursing care impact. Utilizing aspects of the interRAI assessment suite can enhance person-centered care and provide valuable feedback for the nursing workforce and health services.

Limitations

We present evidence supporting the practical and clinical use of interRAI instruments from the perspective of the nurse. However, these instruments are not exclusive to nursing and are used by other healthcare professionals where clinical assessments fall within their scope of practice. While the home care, community and LTC sectors have been robustly using interRAI instruments in Canada, they have yet to be adopted as standard practice in emergency and acute care sectors, indicating areas for future development and integration.⁸⁵ Collecting sector-specific data for evaluation of real-world clinical applications of interRAI assessments and their impact on practice patterns (e.g., referral rates) and patient outcomes (e.g., health decline) can be used to drive health system transformation.

Conclusion

In conclusion, interRAI instruments can be utilized across various healthcare settings to provide a standardized language for supporting care of older adults.³¹ Their practical clinical use enhances point-of-care decisions, care processes and workflow for patients, clinicians and the health system. The educational and practice needs of the clinician and patients in the setting should be considered when adopting new instruments. Informational continuity is crucial for building collaborative capacity and interprofessional practice, this can be achieved by integration of interRAI assessments into existing electronic health records. Nursing and interprofessional teams can use the standardized assessment items and scales within interRAI instruments across sectors to better capture patient care trajectories, improve integration and reduce fragmentation.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to extend their sincere thanks to those who contributed to the scientific review of this manuscript, with particular appreciation to George Heckman, Anja Declercq, Julie Weir, and John Morris.

ORCID iD

Connie Schumacher

Ethical Approval

Institutional review board approval was not required.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Grembowski

Schaefer

Johnson

, et al. A conceptual model of the role of complexity in the care of patients with multiple chronic conditions. Med Care. 2014;52:S7-14. doi:10.1097/MLR.0000000000000045

Liljas

Brattström

Burström

Schön

Agerholm

. Impact of integrated care on patient-related outcomes among older people–a systematic review. Int J Integrated Care. 2019;19(3):6. doi:10.5334/ijic.4632

Gruneir

Bronskill

Maxwell

, et al. The association between multimorbidity and hospitalization is modified by individual demographics and physician continuity of care: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):154-159. doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1415-5

Jones

Bronskill

Agarwal

Seow

Feeny

Costa

. The primary care and other health system use of home care patients: a retrospective cohort analysis. CMAJ Open. 2019;7(2):E360-E370. doi:10.9778/cmajo.20190038

Wallace

Salisbury

Guthrie

Lewis

Fahey

Smith

. Managing patients with multimorbidity in primary care. Br Med J. 2015;350:h176. doi:10.1136/bmj.h176

Bhattacharya

Singh

. Why the tremendous potential of uploading health educational material on medical institutions’ website remains grossly underutilized in the era of the fourth industrial revolution? J Educ Health Promot. 2020;9:248.

Wodchis

Dixon

Anderson

Goodwin

. Integrating care for older people with complex needs: key insights and lessons from a seven-country cross-case analysis. Int J Integrated Care. 2015;15:e021.

Akhlaq

McKinstry

Muhammad

Sheikh

. Barriers and facilitators to health information exchange in low-and middle-income country settings: a systematic review. Health Pol Plann. 2016;31(9):1310-1325. doi:10.1093/heapol/czw056

Weiskopf

Weng

. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inf Assoc. 2013;20(1):144-151.

10.

Heckman

Gray

Hirdes

. Addressing health care needs for frail seniors in Canada: the role of interRAI instruments. Canadian Geriatrics Society Journal. 2013;3(1):8-16.

11.

Lafortune

Elliott

Egan

Stolee

. The rest of the story: a qualitative study of complementing standardized assessment data with informal interviews with older patients and families. Patient. 2017;10(2):215-224. doi:10.1007/s40271-016-0193-9

12.

Haggerty

Roberge

Freeman

Beaulieu

. Experienced continuity of care when patients see multiple clinicians: a qualitative metasummary. Ann Fam Med. 2013;11(3):262-271.

13.

Hennen

. Continuity of care in family practice. Part 1: dimensions of continuity. J Fam Pract. 1975;2(5):371-372.

14.

De Almeida Mello

Hermans

Van Audenhove

Macq

Declercq

. Evaluations of home care interventions for frail older persons using the interRAI home care instrument: a systematic review of the literature. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015;16(2):173-e1.

15.

Hirdes

Ljunggren

Morris

, et al. Reliability of the interRAI suite of assessment instruments: a 12-country study of an integrated health information system. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008a;8(1):277. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-8-277

16.

Morris

James

Fries

, et al. interRAI self-reported Quality of Life (QOL) surveys and user’s manual. Version 9.3. Washington, DC:interRAI (2016).

17.

Geffen

Kelly

Morris

Hogeveen

Hirdes

. Establishing the criterion validity of the interRAI Check-Up self-report instrument. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20(1):260-268. doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01659-9

18.

Whate

Elliott

Carter

Stolee

. Performance of the interRAI ED screener for risk-screening in older adults accessing paramedic services. Can Geriatr J. 2021;24(1):8-13. doi:10.5770/cgj.24.451

19.

Hirdes

Curtin-Telegdi

Poss

, et al. interRAI Contact Assessment (CA) form and User’s manual: a screening level assessment for emergency department and intake from community/hospital. Version 9.2. Washington, DC:interRAI (2010).

20.

Morris

Berg

Bjorkgren

, et al. Interrai Home Care (HC) Assessment Form and User’s Manual. Washington, DC: interRAI Publications; 2010.

21.

Morris

Berg

Bjorkgren

, et al. Interrai Long-Term Care Facilities (LTCF) Assessment Form and User’s Manual. Washington, DC: interRAI Publications; 2020.

22.

Hirdes

Frijters

Teare

. The MDS-CHESS scale: a new measure to predict mortality in institutionalized older people. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51(1):96-100.

23.

Morris

Fries

Mehr

, et al. MDS cognitive performance scale©. J Gerontol. 1994;49(4):M174-M182.

24.

Costa

Hirdes

Bell

, et al. Derivation and validation of the detection of indicators and vulnerabilities for emergency room trips scale for classifying the risk of emergency department use in frail community-dwelling older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015;63(4):763-769.

25.

Morris

Berg

Fries

Steel

Howard

. Scaling functional status within the interRAI suite of assessment instruments. BMC Geriatr. 2013;13(1):128.

26.

Hirdes

Poss

Curtin-Telegdi

. The Method for Assigning Priority Levels (MAPLe): a new decision-support system for allocating home care resources. BMC Med. 2008b;6(1):9. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-6-9

27.

Guthrie

Williams

Beach

, et al. Development and validation of caregiver risk evaluation (CaRE): a new algorithm to screen for caregiver burden. J Appl Gerontol. 2021;40(7):731-741. doi:10.1177/0733464820920102

28.

Slade

Shrichand

DiMillo

. Health Care for an Aging Population: A Study of How Physicians Care for Seniors in Canada. Ottawa, ON: The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada; 2019.

29.

Morris

Howard

Geffen

, et al. Interrai Check Up (CU) Assessment, Supplement, and Self-Reported Forms and Users’ Manual. Version 10.1. Washington, DC: interRAI; 2018.

30.

Iheme

Hirdes

Geffen

Heckman

Hogeveen

. Psychometric properties, feasibility, and acceptability of the self-reported interRAI check-up assessment. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2022;23(1):117-121. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2021.06.008

31.

Northwood

Didyk

Hogeveen

Nova

Kalles

Heckman

. Integrating a standardized self-report tool into geriatric medicine practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement. 2024;43(1):12-22.

32.

Rosser

Colwill

Kasperski

Wilson

. Progress of Ontario’s family health team model: a patient-centered medical home. Ann Fam Med. 2011;9(2):165-171.

33.

Costa

Hirdes

Heckman

, et al. Geriatric syndromes predict post discharge outcomes among older emergency department patients: findings from the interRAI multinational emergency department study. Acad Emerg Med. 2014;21(4):422-433. doi:10.1111/acem.12353

34.

Mowbray

Jones

Schumacher

Hirdes

Costa

. External validation of the detection of indicators and vulnerabilities for emergency room trips (DIVERT) scale: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20(1):413-417. doi:10.1186/s12877-020-01816-0

35.

Gray

Peel

Costa

, et al. Profiles of older patients in the emergency department: findings from the interRAI multinational emergency department study. Ann Emerg Med. 2013;62(5):467-474. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.05.008

36.

Ellis

Brousseau

Eagles

Sinclair

Melady

CAEP Writing Group . Canadian association of emergency physicians position statement on care of older people in Canadian emergency departments: executive summary. Can J Emerg Med. 2022;24:376-381. doi:10.1007/s43678-022-00315-y

37.

Brousseau

Dent

Hubbard

, et al. Identification of older adults with frailty in the emergency department using a frailty index: results from a multinational study. Age Ageing. 2018;47(2):242-248. doi:10.1093/ageing/afx168

38.

Costa

Hirdes

Ariño-Blasco

, et al. interRAI Emergency Department (ED) Assessment System Manual, for Use with the interRAI ED Screener (EDS) and ED Contact Assessment (ED-CA). Washington, DC: interRAI; 2017a.

39.

Gretarsdottir

Jonsdottir

Sigurthorsdottir

, et al. Patients in need of comprehensive geriatric assessment: the utility of the InterRAI emergency department screener. Int Emerg Nurs. 2021;54:100943. doi:10.1016/j.ienj.2020.100943

40.

Leaker

Fox

Holroyd-Leduc

. The impact of geriatric emergency management nurses on the care of frail older patients in the emergency department: a systematic review. Can Geriatr J. 2020;23(3):250-256. doi:10.5770/cgj.23.408

41.

Sinha

Bessman

Flomenbaum

Leff

. A systematic review and qualitative analysis to inform the development of a new emergency department-based geriatric case management model. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;57(6):672-682. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.01.02

42.

Carpenter

Mooijaart

. Geriatric screeners 2.0: time for a paradigm shift in emergency department vulnerability research. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020;68(7):1402-1405. doi:10.1111/jgs.16502

43.

Nova

Heckman

Gill-Chawla

, et al. Patterns of referral to interprofessional services among frail older adults presenting to emergency departments in Canada. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2025;73(2):431-444.

44.

Mowbray

Ellis

Schumacher

, et al. The association between frailty and a nurse-identified need for comprehensive geriatric assessment referral from the emergency department. Can J Nurs Res. 2023;55(3):404-412.

45.

Southlake Regional Health Centre . Southlake @Home. 2019. Retrieved from: Southlake@Home-Southlake Regional Health Centre

46.

Ontario Government . Ontario expanding nursing care. https://news.ontario.ca/en/backgrounder/20937/ontario-expanding-nursing-care

47.

Schumacher

Lackey

Mitchell

Sinha

Costa

. A chronic disease management intervention for home care patients with cardio-respiratory symptoms: the DIVERT-CARE intervention. Can J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2018;28(3):18-26.

48.

Mowbray

Aryal

Mercier

Heckman

Costa

. Older emergency department patients: does baseline care status matter? Can Geriatr J. 2020;23(4):289-296. doi:10.5770/cgj.23.421

49.

Costa

Schumacher

Jones

, et al. DIVERT-Collaboration Action Research and Evaluation (CARE) trial protocol: a multiprovincial pragmatic cluster randomised trial of cardiorespiratory management in home care. BMJ Open. 2019;9(12):e030301. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030301

50.

Costa

Haughton

Heckman

Bronskill

Sinha

McKelvie

. The DIVERT-CARE catalyst trial: targeted chronic-disease management for home care clients. Innovation in aging. 2017b;1(suppl_1):322-323. doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.1189

51.

Hallman

LeVasseur

Bérard-Chagnon

Martel

. A Portrait of Canada’s Growing Population Aged 85 and Older from the 2021 Census. Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada’s Centre for Demography; 2022. Available from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/as-sa/98-200-X/2021004/98-200-X2021004-eng

52.

Kaur

Rowland

Whiting

. The ABCD of the comprehensive geriatric assessment. Med J Aust. 2021;215(5):206-207.e1. doi:10.5694/mja2.51203

53.

Hirdes

Fries

Morris

, et al. Integrated health information systems based on the RAI/MDS series of instruments. Healthc Manag Forum. 1999;12(4):30-40. doi:10.1016/S0840-4704(10)60164-0

54.

Morris

Berg

Bjorkgren

, et al. interRAI Clinical Assessment Protocols (CAPs): For Use With Community and Long-Term Care Assessment Instruments. 9.1 ed. Rockport, MA: Open Book Systems (OBS), Inc; 2010.

55.

Hirdes

Retalic

Muskat

Morris

Katz

. The Seniors Quality Leap Initiative (SQLI): an international collaborative to improve quality in long-term care. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020;21(12):1931-1936. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2020.07.024

56.

Fries

Fahey

Hawes

, et al. Implementing the resident assessment instrument: case studies of policymaking for long-term care in eight countries. Milbank Memorial Fund. 2003;129:Available from: https://catalogue.iugm.qc.ca/GED_IUG/193677991185/15825.PDF

57.

Canadian Institute for Health Information . Use of antipsychotics among seniors living in long-term care facilities. 2014. 2016. https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/LTC_AiB_v2_19_EN_web.pdf

58.

Schumacher

Dash

Mowbray

Klea

Costa

. A qualitative study of home care client and caregiver experiences with a complex cardio-respiratory management model. BMC Geriatr. 2021;21(1):295.

59.

Hermans

Spruytte

Cohen

Van Audenhove

Declercq

. Usefulness, feasibility and face validity of the interRAI palliative care instrument according to care professionals in nursing homes: a qualitative study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;62:90-99. doi:10.1186/s12877-021-02251-5

60.

Kangasniemi

Ryhtä

Stolt

. Nursing staff and nursing managers’ experiences of using the interRAI ID instrument in assessing the service needs of persons with intellectual disabilities in housing services. J Pol Pract Intellect Disabil. 2022;20:136.

61.

Miller

Moon

Anders

Walden

Brown

Montella

. Integrating computerized clinical decision support systems into clinical work: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Int J Med Inf. 2015;84(12):1009-1018.

62.

Turcotte

Tran

Moralejo

Curtin-Telegdi

Eckel

Hirdes

. Evaluation of a staff training programme to reimplement a comprehensive health assessment. BMJ Open Qual. 2018;7(4):e000353. doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2018-000353

63.

de Almeida Mello

Wellens

NIH

Hermans

, et al. The implementation of integrated health information systems–research studies from 7 countries involving the InterRAI assessment system. Int J Integrated Care. 2023;23(1):8. doi:10.5334/ijic.6968

64.

Brownie

Chalmers

Broman

Andersen

. Evaluating an undergraduate nursing student telehealth placement for community-dwelling frail older people during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Clin Nurs. 2022;32(1-2):147.

65.

Vanneste

Vermeulen

Declercq

. Healthcare professionals’ acceptance of BelRAI, a web-based system enabling person-centred recording and data sharing across care settings with interRAI instruments: a UTAUT analysis. BMC Med Inf Decis Making. 2013;13(1):129.

66.

Guthrie

Pitman

Fletcher

, et al. Data sharing between home care professionals: a feasibility study using the RAI home care instrument. BMC Geriatr. 2014;14(1):81-89. https://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2318/14/81

67.

Giosa

Stolee

Holyoke

. Development and testing of the geriatric care assessment practices (G-CAP) survey. BMC Geriatr. 2021;21(1):220. doi:10.1186/s12877-021-02073-5

68.

Landi

Onder

Tua

, et al. Impact of a new assessment system, the MDS-HC, on function and hospitalization of homebound older people: a controlled clinical trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49(10):1288-1293. doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49264.x

69.

Stolle

Wolter

Roth

Rothgang

. Improving health status and reduction of institutionalization in long-term care—effects of the resident assessment instrument-home care by degree of implementation. Int J Nurs Pract. 2015;21(5):612-621.

70.

Scott

Oyewole-Eletu

, et al. Understanding facilitators and barriers to care transitions: insights from project ACHIEVE site visits. Joint Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2017;43(9):433-447.

71.

Heckman

Gimbel

Mensink

, et al. The integrated care team: a primary care based approach to support older adults with complex health needs. Healthc Manag Forum. 2025;38(3): 192-199. doi:10.1177/08404704241293051.

72.

Boorsma

Frijters

Knol

Ribbe

Nijpels

van Hout

. Effects of multidisciplinary integrated care on quality of care in residential care facilities for elderly people: a cluster randomized trial. CMAJ (Can Med Assoc J). 2011;183(11):E724-E732. doi:10.1503/cmaj.101498

73.

de Stampa

Cerase

Bagaragaza

, et al. Implementation of a standardized comprehensive assessment tool in France: a case using the interRAI instruments. Int J Integrated Care. 2018;18(2):5.

74.

Sales

Bostrom

Bucknall

, et al. The use of data for process and quality improvement in long term care and home care: a systematic review of the literature. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012;13(2):103-113.

75.

Carpenter

Hirdes

. Using interRAI assessment systems to measure and maintain quality of long-term care. A Good Life in Old Age. 2013;17:93-139.

76.

Redley

Raggatt

. Use of standard risk screening and assessment forms to prevent harm to older people in Australian hospitals: a mixed methods study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017;26(9):704-713.

77.

Charalambous

Goldberg

. ‘Gaps, mishaps and overlaps’. Nursing documentation: how does it affect care? J Res Nurs. 2016;21(8):638-648.

78.

Bail

Grealish

. ‘Failure to maintain’: a theoretical proposition for a new quality indicator of nurse care rationing for complex older people in hospital. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;63:146-161.

79.

Doran DM, Sidani S, DePietro T. Nurse-sensitive outcomes. Foundations of clinical nurse specialists practice.In: Foulton JS, Lyon BL, Goudreau KA, editors. Clinical Foundations of Clinical Nurse Specialist Practice. Second Edition. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 2010. 41-64.

80.

Sinn

Betini

Wright

, et al. Adverse events in home care: identifying and responding with interRAI scales and clinical assessment protocols. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement. 2018;37(1):60-69.

81.

Bail

Gibson

Acharya

, et al. Using health information technology in residential aged care homes: an integrative review to identify service and quality outcomes. Int J Med Inf. 2022;165:104824.

82.

Carlisle

Perera

Stutzman

Brown-Cleere

Parwaiz

Olson

. Efficacy of using available data to examine nurse staffing ratios and quality of care metrics. J Neurosci Nurs. 2020;52(2):78-83.

83.

Veldhuizen

Hafsteinsdóttir

Mikkers

Bleijenberg

Schuurmans

. Evidence-based interventions and nurse-sensitive outcomes in district nursing care: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud Adv. 2021;3:100053.

84.

De Groot

Triemstra

Paans

Francke

. Quality criteria, instruments, and requirements for nursing documentation: a systematic review of systematic reviews. J Adv Nurs. 2019;75(7):1379-1393.

85.

Sinn

Hirdes

Poss

Boscart

Heckman

. Implementation Evaluation of a Stepped Approach to Home Care Assessment Using interRAI Systems in Ontario. Ottawa, ON: Health & Social Care in the Community; 2022. doi:10.1111/hsc.13784

Care Planning Across the Health System: Intersectoral Application of the interRAI Assessment System

Abstract

Introduction

Description of Care Practice: Intersectoral Approach to Assessment

interRAI Check-Up Self-Report: Robert is Seen in Primary Care

Emergency Department Assessment System: Robert Visits the Emergency Department

Home Care Assessment System: Robert Receives Home Care Supports

Long-Term Care Transitioning Robert to Ensure Well-Being and Comfort

Discussion

Patient-Level Efficiencies

Optimizing Interprofessional and Sectoral Integration

Nursing Workforce and Impact

Limitations

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

ORCID iD

Ethical Approval

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

References