scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jonathan Darer

Bio: Jonathan Darer is an academic researcher from Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Health care & Pay for performance. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 6 publications receiving 5626 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A narrative review of current understanding of the definitions and distinguishing characteristics of each of these conditions, including their clinical relevance and distinct prevention and therapeutic issues, and how they are related is provided.
Abstract: Three terms are commonly used interchangeably to identify vulnerable older adults: comorbidity, or multiple chronicconditions,frailty, anddisability. However, in geriatricmedicine,there isagrowingconsensusthatthese are distinct clinical entities that are causally related. Each, individually, occurs frequently and has high import clinically. This article provides a narrative review of current understanding of the definitions and distinguishing characteristics of each of these conditions,including theirclinical relevance and distinct prevention and therapeutic issues, and how they are related. Review of the current state of published knowledge is supplemented by targeted analysesin selectedareas where no current publisheddataexists. Overall,the goalof this articleis to providea basis fordistinguishingbetweenthesethreeimportantclinicalconditionsinolderadultsandshowinghowuseofseparate, distinct definitions of each can improve our understanding of the problems affecting older patients and lead to development of improved strategies for diagnosis, care, research, and medical education in this area.

3,394 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
10 Aug 2005-JAMA
TL;DR: It is suggested that adhering to current CPGs in caring for an older person with several comorbidities may have undesirable effects and could create perverse incentives that emphasize the wrong aspects of care for this population and diminish the quality of their care.
Abstract: ContextClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed to improve the quality of health care for many chronic conditions. Pay-for-performance initiatives assess physician adherence to interventions that may reflect CPG recommendations.ObjectiveTo evaluate the applicability of CPGs to the care of older individuals with several comorbid diseases.Data SourcesThe National Health Interview Survey and a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries (to identify the most prevalent chronic diseases in this population); the National Guideline Clearinghouse (for locating evidence-based CPGs for each chronic disease).Study SelectionOf the 15 most common chronic diseases, we selected hypertension, chronic heart failure, stable angina, atrial fibrillation, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes mellitus, osteoarthritis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and osteoporosis, which are usually managed in primary care, choosing CPGs promulgated by national and international medical organizations for each.Data ExtractionTwo investigators independently assessed whether each CPG addressed older patients with multiple comorbid diseases, goals of treatment, interactions between recommendations, burden to patients and caregivers, patient preferences, life expectancy, and quality of life. Differences were resolved by consensus. For a hypothetical 79-year-old woman with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis, hypertension, and osteoarthritis, we aggregated the recommendations from the relevant CPGs.Data SynthesisMost CPGs did not modify or discuss the applicability of their recommendations for older patients with multiple comorbidities. Most also did not comment on burden, short- and long-term goals, and the quality of the underlying scientific evidence, nor give guidance for incorporating patient preferences into treatment plans. If the relevant CPGs were followed, the hypothetical patient would be prescribed 12 medications (costing her $406 per month) and a complicated nonpharmacological regimen. Adverse interactions between drugs and diseases could result.ConclusionsThis review suggests that adhering to current CPGs in caring for an older person with several comorbidities may have undesirable effects. Basing standards for quality of care and pay for performance on existing CPGs could lead to inappropriate judgment of the care provided to older individuals with complex comorbidities and could create perverse incentives that emphasize the wrong aspects of care for this population and diminish the quality of their care. Developing measures of the quality of the care needed by older patients with complex comorbidities is critical to improving their care.

2,247 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Physicians perceived their medical training for chronic illness care was inadequate and medical schools and residencies may need to modify curricula to better prepare physicians to treat the growing number of people with chronic conditions.
Abstract: Purpose.Although more than 125 million North Americans have one or more chronic conditions, medical training may not adequately prepare physicians to care for them. The authors evaluated physicians’ perceptions of the adequacy of their chronic illness care training to and the effects of trai

156 citations

01 Jan 2002
TL;DR: The use of critical pathways varies substantially among hospitals participating in quality improvement consortia, with use highest in academic centers and lowest in community hospitals.
Abstract: Context Although hospitals have devoted substantial resources to critical pathways, it is not known whether they routinely evaluate the clinical or economic effects of these pathways. Objective To determine how use and evaluation of critical pathways differ between academic and community hospitals. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants Hospitals participating in consortia for improving quality of care associated with the Institute of Health Care Improvement and the VHA, Inc. (formerly known as the Voluntary Hospitals of America, Inc.). Hospital administrators at 41 hospitals completed the survey (71% response rate), representing 13 academic medical centers, 13 community teaching hospitals, and 15 community hospitals. Measures Use of critical pathways and measurement of clinical and economic outcomes of pathways. Results The median number of adult critical pathways used by academic hospitals, community teaching hospitals, and community hospitals was 25, 18, and 3, respectively. The most common pathways were community-acquired pneumonia, total hip or knee replacement, and stroke or transient ischemic attack. The percentage of hospitals with pathways dedicating staff to manage them was 78% for academic hospitals, 22% for community teaching hospitals, and 14% for community hospitals (P = 0.02). Evaluation practices varied widely among hospitals with pathways. Measures assessed included monitoring length of stay (85%), total hospital costs (74%), in-hospital mortality (62%), infectious complications (53%), readmission rates (47%), functional status (18%), and adverse drug events (15%). Conclusion The use of critical pathways varies substantially among hospitals participating in quality improvement consortia. Use was highest in academic centers and lowest in community hospitals. Many hospitals with pathways do not track important clinical outcomes as part of their evaluation practices.

44 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.
Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

9,618 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Developing more efficient methods to detect frailty and measure its severity in routine clinical practice would greatly inform the appropriate selection of elderly people for invasive procedures or drug treatments and would be the basis for a shift in the care of frail elderly people towards more appropriate goal-directed care.

5,456 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The ability of the Clinical Frailty Scale to predict death or need for institutional care, and correlated the results with those obtained from other established tools are determined.
Abstract: Background: There is no single generally accepted clinical definition of frailty. Previously developed tools to assess frailty that have been shown to be predictive of death or need for entry into an institutional facility have not gained acceptance among practising clinicians. We aimed to develop a tool that would be both predictive and easy to use. Methods: We developed the 7-point Clinical Frailty Scale and applied it and other established tools that measure frailty to 2305 elderly patients who participated in the second stage of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA). We followed this cohort prospectively; after 5 years, we determined the ability of the Clinical Frailty Scale to predict death or need for institutional care, and correlated the results with those obtained from other established tools. Results: The CSHA Clinical Frailty Scale was highly correlated ( r = 0.80) with the Frailty Index. Each 1-category increment of our scale significantly increased the medium-term risks of death (21.2% within about 70 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5%–30.6%) and entry into an institution (23.9%, 95% CI 8.8%–41.2%) in multivariable models that adjusted for age, sex and education. Analyses of receiver operating characteristic curves showed that our Clinical Frailty Scale performed better than measures of cognition, function or comorbidity in assessing risk for death (area under the curve 0.77 for 18-month and 0.70 for 70-month mortality). Interpretation: Frailty is a valid and clinically important construct that is recognizable by physicians. Clinical judgments about frailty can yield useful predictive information.

5,189 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The findings challenge the single-disease framework by which most health care, medical research, and medical education is configured, and a complementary strategy is needed, supporting generalist clinicians to provide personalised, comprehensive continuity of care, especially in socioeconomically deprived areas.

4,839 citations