Katleen Fagard

Background: geriatric consultation teams have failed to impact clinical outcomes prompting geriatric co-management programmes to emerge as a promising strategy to manage frail patients on non-geriatric wards. Objective: to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of in-hospital geriatric co-management. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 6 May 2016. Reference lists, trial registers and PubMed Central Citations were additionally searched. Study selection: randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies of in-hospital patients included in a geriatric co-management study. Two investigators performed the selection process independently. Data extraction: standardised data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were performed independently by two investigators. Results: twelve studies and 3,590 patients were included from six randomised and six quasi-experimental studies. Geriatric co-management improved functional status and reduced the number of patients with complications in three of the four studies, but studies had a high risk of bias and outcomes were measured heterogeneously and could not be pooled. Co-management reduced the length of stay (pooled mean difference, -1.88 days [95% CI, -2.44 to -1.33]; 11 studies) and may reduce in-hospital mortality (pooled odds ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.50-1.03]; 7 studies). Meta-analysis identified no effect on the number of patients discharged home (5 studies), post-discharge mortality (3 studies) and readmission rate (4 studies). Conclusions: there was low-quality evidence of a reduced length of stay and a reduced number of patients with complications, and very low-quality evidence of better functional status as a result of geriatric co-management.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) aim to attenuate the surgical stress response and accelerate recovery after surgery, but are not specifically designed for older patients. The objective of this study was to review the components, adherence and outcomes of ERPs in older patients (≥65 years) undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase and Cinahl were searched between 2000 and 2017 for randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, before-after studies, and observational studies. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the MINORS quality assessment. The review was performed and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies, including 3495 ERP patients aged ≥65 years, were identified. The ERPs consisted of a median of 13 intervention components. Adherence rates were reported in 9 studies and were the highest (≥80%) for pre-admission counselling, no bowel preparation, limited pre-operative fasting, antithrombotic and antimicrobial prophylaxis, no nasogastric tube, active warming, and limited intra-operative fluids. The median post-operative length of stay was 6 days. The median post-operative morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo I-IV) was 23.5% in-hospital and 29.8% at 30 days. The in-hospital post-operative mortality rate was 0% in most studies and amounted to a median of 1.4% at 30 days. The median 30-day readmission rate was 4.9% and the median reoperation rate was 5.0%. CONCLUSIONS: ERPs in older patients were in accordance with the ERP consensus guidelines. Although the number of intervention components applied increased over time, outcomes in earlier and later studies remained comparable. Adherence rates were under-reported. Future studies should explore adherence and age-related factors, such as frailty profile, that could influence adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018084756 .