北京部分社区老年人共病及老年综合征调查分析

目的调查北京部分社区老年人慢性疾病(简称慢病)及老年综合征的患病情况,为优化和配置卫生资源提供依据。方法对2013年2—5月北京市朝阳区香河园街道4个社区自愿接受调查的老年人进行问卷调查,调查内容包括一般情况、慢病、老年综合征和躯体功能等。结果共1187例老年人接受调查,中位年龄76(65~98)岁,平均(75.7±7.0)岁;其中男性561例,女性626例。受访老人中,最常见的慢病依次为高血压病[611例(51.5%)]、骨关节病[439例(37.0%)]和糖尿病[251例(21.1%)];至少患有1种慢病者为1016例(85.6%),至少有2种者(共病)为676例(57.0%),有3种及以上慢病者为345例(29.1%)。受访老人中,97.2%(1154例)的老年人至少有1种老年综合征,患老年综合征中位数为4种(0~12种)。慢病数量与老年综合征数量呈正相关(r=0.360,P=0.000)。慢病≥3种的老年人与慢病3种的老年人比较,躯体功能较差(χ~2=21.56,P=0.000)。老年综合征数量与老年人Barthel ADL评分呈负相关(r=-0.438,P=0.000),而慢病数量与其相关性则较小(r=-0.140,P=0.000)。结论社区老年人患有共病和老年综合征的比例均较高,且二者数量呈正相关。老年综合征较慢病对老年躯体功能影响更大。     

社区居住的老年糖尿病患者的营养状态评估

目的本研究拟探索社区居住的老年糖尿病患者的营养状况,并与非糖尿病老年人进行比较。方法纳入2013年至2014年在北京香河园社区居住的老年人820名为研究对象,依据是否患糖尿病分为2组:糖尿病组(n=170)和非糖尿病组(n=650)。该研究由接受过问卷调查培训并通过考核的研究助理在社区卫生服务中心或入户对老年人进行面对面访视。应用老年医学疾病累积评分量表(CIRS-G)进行慢病评分。应用微营养评估简表(MNA-SF)进行营养评估。依据体质量指数(BMI)不同,将糖尿病组患者分为5个亚组,与MNA-SF的营养评估结果进行χ~2分析。采用SPSS 20.0软件进行数据处理。结果 820名研究对象年龄65～97(75.4±6.7)岁,患病数(4.7±3.3)种,其中727名(88.7%)老年人可生活自理,其余可半自理。糖尿病组的CIRS-G评分显著高于非糖尿病组[(6.38±3.67)vs(4.28±3.09)分,P0.001]。糖尿病组和非糖尿病组营养不良(5.9%vs 6.3%)和营养不良风险(48.2%vs 45.8%)的发生率差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。糖尿病组超重(38.2%vs 34.5%)和肥胖(19.4%vs 13.8%)的发生率均显著高于非糖尿病组(P0.05)。各糖尿病亚组患者营养状态与BMI水平差异无统计学意义(χ~2=10.394,P=0.238)。结论社区糖尿病老年人的营养不良发生率与非糖尿病的老年人无明显不同,约半数糖尿病老年人存在营养不良风险。糖尿病患者营养状态与BMI水平无明显相关性。     

城市社区健康状态较差老年人的状况评估及分析

目的了解社区健康状态较差的老年人的需求,为合理干预提供依据。方法 2013年2月至2013年5月对北京市部分社区≥65(79.2±8.3)岁、健康状态较差的209位老年人进行老年综合评估。结果巴氏日常生活活动能力(Barthel-ADL)正常者50例(23.9%),功能受损者159例(76.1%);所有老年人均有≥2个多种慢性状况(MCC),受调查者有老年综合征3.9[4(3,5)]个,高于平均慢性疾病数3.5[3(2,4)]个,功能受损组老人慢性疾病及老年综合征数均高于功能正常组(P=0.007,P=0.05)。需要他人照顾者占79.9%,其中照顾者为配偶者占50.3%。每年规律接种流感疫苗者仅占8.1%,规律体检者占14.8%。结论老年综合征对该人群影响更大,应予以重视;社区针对失能老年人的医学照护模式、照顾者负担等问题仍需关注。     

社区老年人抑郁症状的调查与分析

目的 :调查上海市社区老年抑郁症患病率及其影响因素。方法 :随机抽取上海市4个社区年龄≥60岁老年人,采用老年抑郁量表(geriatric depression scale,GDS)及自制调查表进行访谈,对各因素进行单因素分析,在单因素分析中差异具有统计学意义的因素进行多因素分析。结果:本研究调查共488名,GDS得分>10分者有39名,经医师评估确诊为老年抑郁症者为33例,老年抑郁症的检出率为6.8%。老年抑郁症女性的患病率高于男性(χ~2=2.891,P=0.039);患慢性疾病如心脏病、糖尿病的老年人患抑郁症的概率较高(分别为χ~2=16.588,P=0.001;χ~2=0.238,P=0.017);有睡眠障碍的老年人较无睡眠障碍的老年人更易患抑郁症(χ~2=0.036,P=0.046),有午睡习惯的老年人患抑郁症的概率较低(χ~2=4.208,P=0.040);受教育水平高者,患老年抑郁症的概率低(χ~2=2.440,P=0.035);脑力劳动者、有业余爱好的老年人患抑郁症的可能性小(分别为χ~2=0.024,P=0.046;χ~2=9.229,P=0.002)。在单因素分析中差异具有统计学意义的研究因素作为自变量,以逐步法建立条件Logistic回归模型,在α=0.05水平上,共有4个因素进入回归模型,性别、职业、业余爱好、慢性疾病(心脏病)与老年抑郁症状的发生显著相关,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:性别、文化程度、职业、业余爱好、慢性疾病、睡眠障碍是老年人患抑郁症的影响因素,应采取针对性的措施预防老年抑郁症的发生。     

老年冠心病住院患者营养状态评估及对住院日影响的研究

目的探讨老年冠心病患者,应用简易营养评价精简法(MNA-SF)进行营养评估的可行性和价值,并评价营养状态对住院日等治疗相关指标的影响。方法采用前瞻性研究,随机入选住院的老年冠心病患者86例,根据MNA-SF评分分为营养正常组45例及营养不良组41例。研究对象又根据是否合并糖尿病分为糖尿病组38例,非糖尿病组48例。同时获取血脂、尿酸、蛋白等实验室检查结果,比较MNA-SF评分对营养评估的一致性。并以MNA-SF评分作为营养状态的量化指标,观察其与住院日的相关性。结果与营养正常组比较,营养不良组跌倒风险、住院天数明显升高[(11.14±6.31)分vs(7.91±4.68)分,P0.05;(17.49±7.01)d vs(12.93±4.37)d,P0.05],白蛋白和MNA-SF评分明显降低[(37.57±5.11)g/L vs(40.01±3.79)g/L,P0.05;(9.07±2.05)分vs(12.87±1.04)分,P0.01]。糖尿病组与非糖尿病组跌倒风险和住院日比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。多重线性回归分析显示,MNA-SF评分与住院日呈负相关(r=-0.614,P=0.000),回归方程为:住院日=36.459-0.614×MNA-SF评分。结论老年冠心病患者中,白蛋白水平降低是营养不良的表现之一。营养不良会增加跌倒的风险,并且导致住院日明显延长。     

微型营养评估简表在老年慢性病住院患者营养筛查中的应用

目的评价新版微型营养评定简表(MNA-SF)在老年慢性病住院患者营养状况评估中的应用价值。方法选取2016年3月至2018年5月在成都市老年康疗院住院、年龄≥65岁的老年患者2 861例,在入院后48 h内用新版MNA-SF进行营养筛查。采用克朗巴赫系数α评价MNA-SF的信度;采用Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin(KMO)和巴特利特球形检验分析评价MNA-SF的效度。根据MNA-SF评分将患者分为营养正常组(n=319)、营养不良风险组(n=1 046)及营养不良组(n=1 496),比较3组患者营养相关指标差异。用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析量表对营养状况的预测。采用SPSS 22.0软件进行分析,组间比较采用方差分析、LSD-t检验、秩和检验或χ2检验。结果老年慢性病住院患者营养不良发生率为52. 3%(1 496/2 861)。MNA-SF量表的克隆巴赫系数为0.711,表明MNA-SF量表的信度较好。KMO值为0.827,可以进行因子分析;巴特利特球形检验χ2=27. 616(P0.05),得出球形假设被拒绝,适合进行因子分析。MNA-SF量表中7个因子[饮食变化、近3个月的体质量减轻情况、活动能力、应激或急性疾病情况、神经精神疾病、体质量指数(BMI)、小腿围(CC)]的特征值均大于1,且累计方差贡献率达到83. 14%,表明该量表效度合理。营养正常组、营养不良风险组及营养不良组患者的年龄呈趋势性增加,BMI、CC、血清白蛋白、前白蛋白、转铁蛋白及血红蛋白呈趋势性降低,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。ROC曲线显示,预测老年慢性病住院患者营养状况的最佳截断点为10分,其灵敏度为78.93%,特异度为83.59%,曲线下面积为0.797(95%CI 0. 781～0. 811,P0.05)。结论新版MNA-SF适用于老年慢性病住院患者的营养评估,老年慢性病住院患者营养不良发生率较高,应当尽早进行营养干预。     

应用微型营养评估简表对老年科住院患者进行营养评估及预后调查

目的：探讨老年科住院患者营养状态与临床结局的关系。方法入选98例2011年11月至2012年3月在中国医学科学院北京协和医院老年科住院的≥60岁的患者进行前瞻性调查。入院72h内完成实验室指标、微型营养评估简表（MNA-SF）、膳食回顾、人体测量和体成分分析等营养评定,观察临床结局（死亡、并发症及总住院时间等）。结果98例患者均全部完成了整个调查,年龄（74.06±7.90）岁。MNA-SF结果正常营养状态者40例（40.82%）,营养不良危险37例（37.76%）,营养不良21例（21.43%）。营养不良者年龄（79.1±9.3）岁,明显高于其余两组（均P＜0.05）。营养不良者前白蛋白[（114.7±62.5）mg/L,n＝19]水平明显低于营养正常组[（204.0±65.2）mg/L, n＝37,P＜0.05]和营养不良危险组[（175.1±58.3）mg/L,n＝34,P＜0.05]。营养不良组感染并发症（28.6%）明显高于营养正常组（12.5%）和营养不良危险组（5.4%）。营养不良组的平均住院时间[（21.9±8.9）d]均高于营养正常组[（14.9±5.9）d]和营养不良危险组[（15.9±7.5）d,均P＜0.05）]。所有患者死亡2例,均发生在营养不良组。结论住院老年患者,营养不良及营养不良危险的发生率较高。营养不良延长住院老年患者的住院时间,增加感染并发症,甚至可能增加死亡风险。     

高龄老年住院患者营养状况的分析

目的评估≥80岁老年住院患者的营养情况,分析营养不良相关的危险因素。方法对于入住我院高龄老年患者,应用微型营养评定法简版(Mini-nutritional Assessment short-form,MNA-SF)评估其营养状况,并根据评分结果分为营养正常组和营养不良(风险)组,比较分析两组相关临床资料的差异。结果 (1)共纳入≥80岁老年住院患者258例,平均年龄(85.12±3.91)岁,平均MNA-SF分值为(10.24±3.16)分。营养不良发生率为19.77%(51例),营养不良风险发生率为41.09%(106例),营养正常者仅占39.15%(101例)。比较分析发现,两组在年龄和合并脑血管病上有统计学意义(P0.05)。营养相关指标上,两组患者在体质指数(BMI)、上臂围(MAC)、小腿围(CC)、手握力、白蛋白(ALB)、血红蛋白(Hb)、总淋巴细胞计数(TLC)上的差异具有统计学意义(P0.05),而在甘油三酯(TG)、总胆固醇(TC)上差异无统计学意义。结论年龄≥80岁的老年住院人群营养不良以及营养不良风险的发生率极高。营养相关指标的检测和早期的营养筛查,有助于了解患者的营养状态,便于指导临床的治疗和护理干预。     

NRS-2002与MNA-SF营养评估对恶性梗阻性黄疸患者术后生存期的预测价值

目的本研究通过营养风险评估表(NRS-2002)与简易营养评价精法(MNA-SF)评分筛查恶性梗阻性黄疸(MOJ)患者营养状态并探讨其与术后总生存期(OS)的关系。方法选取2016年1月-2018年1月在北京市空军特色医学中心就诊并行经皮肝穿刺胆道引流术+胆道支架植入术的78例MOJ患者。入院24 h内进行营养筛查。计量资料多组间比较采用方差分析,进一步两两比较采用SNK-q检验;计数资料组间比较采用χ2检验。采用一致性检验评估NRS-2002与MNA-SF的一致性;采用多元线性回归分析NRS-2002与MNA-SF的独立影响因素;根据单因素及多因素Cox比例风险回归分析OS的独立危险因素。采用Kaplan-Meier法绘制不同营养状态患者的生存曲线,并用log-rank检验进行分析。结果 NRS-2002评估中,营养正常10例(12. 8%),营养不良风险53例(67. 9%),营养不良15例(19. 2%)。MNA-SF评估中,营养正常7例(9. 0%),营养不良风险32例(41. 0%),营养不良39例(50. 0%)。年龄、BMI均是NRS-2002与MNA-SF的独立影响因素(P值均0. 05)。NRS-2002与MNA-SF的一致性评价较好(Kappa=0. 418,P 0. 001)。两种营养评分量表均表明,营养不良患者OS低于营养不良风险及营养正常患者(χ2=42. 081,P 0. 001);营养不良风险患者OS低于营养正常患者(χ2=33. 723,P 0. 001)。NRS-2002[营养不良(风险比=3. 874,95%可信区间:1. 065～14. 099)]、MNA-SF[营养不良风险(风险比=15. 544,95%可信区间:2. 324～103. 968);营养不良(风险比=42. 535,95%可信区间:6. 179～292. 798)]是患者OS的独立影响因素(P值均0. 05)。结论 MNA-SF筛查MOJ患者营养状态具有优越性,能更准确预测OS。因此,将其推荐为MOJ患者入院时营养筛查工具并根据筛查结果进行营养干预。     

老年代谢综合征病人微型营养评估及相关因素的研究

目的应用微型营养评估对老年代谢综合征(metabolic syndrome,MS)病人的营养状况进行评价,并探究其营养不良的相关因素。方法选取≥60岁的老年MS病人102例为观察组,以正常体检的80例老年人为对照组。2组均采用微型营养评估法(mini nutritional assessment,MNA)进行营养评估,并测定观察组传统营养指标,用二分类Logistic回归分析筛选出老年MS病人营养不良的相关因素。结果观察组营养不良发生率为28.43%,高于对照组的10.00%,差异有统计学意义(χ~2=9.404,P=0.002)。二分类Logistic回归分析显示低白蛋白血症(OR=47.705,P0.001)、血清前白蛋白偏低(OR=5.650,P0.05)以及高敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)增高(OR=6.633,P0.05)与老年MS病人营养不良相关。结论重视老年MS病人的微型营养评估,尤其对于合并低白蛋白血症、血清前白蛋白降低以及hs-CRP增高等病人进行及时营养干预,对改善老年MS病人营养不良状况具有重要临床意义。     

Geriatrics training and education for nongeriatrician faculty: the Dean's Faculty Scholars in Aging Program

The University of South Carolina School of Medicine in Columbia implemented the Dean's Faculty Scholars in Aging (DFSA) Program in 2001 to strengthen the knowledge of geriatrics of nongeriatrician faculty members. The primary indicator of strengthening physicians' geriatrics knowledge was the development of new educational experiences by physicians in the DFSA Program. Twenty-six nongeriatrician faculty in seven departments were recruited to participate as scholars. Most scholars were in key educational positions, including assistant deans, department chairs, and clerkship and residency directors. Scholars received special training to develop geriatrics educational experiences based on their medical specialty and interests. Training encouraged cross-departmental collaboration. Scholars also had access to resources, including professional geriatric educators. Funds were available to support development of educational experiences and for a small amount of salary support. Since the program was implemented, 36 new geriatric experiences have been developed, 29 of the 36 were implemented, and 11 of the 36 were evaluated. Experiences included an elective for residents in the care of older patients in the emergency room and a required hospice rotation in the psychiatry clerkship for third-year medical students. All scholars developed a geriatrics educational experience, and most implemented one. This suggests that scholars demonstrated successful progress in geriatrics training.     

老年综合评估及多学科团队服务在老年共病干预中的应用

目的 探讨住院老年患者通过老年综合评估(CGA)及多学科团队服务(GITS)进行多维度诊疗,为老年患者提供科学、合理的个性化诊疗模式,有效改善共病诊疗效果及生活质量。方法 选取年龄≥60岁的老年科共病患者,分为观察组和对照组。使用自主开发的“老年综合评估软件V2.0”对210例老年患者入院7天内进行老年综合评估,随后观察组根据评估结果给予共病、老年综合征、心理、认知及生活方式等全面综合干预,对照组仅给予共病干预。干预3个月后行第2次老年综合评估,比较观察组与对照组共病及生活质量改善情况。结果 (1)观察组比对照组血压、血糖控制效果更好(P<0.05),观察组比对照组慢性心衰急性加重、慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重发生人数减少(P<0.05)。(2)老年综合征及生活质量：观察组比对照组Barthel指数得分及MMSE得分显著提高(P<0.05),观察组比对照组营养、抑郁、焦虑、跌倒、衰弱均有显著改善(P<0.05),因促眠药物的应用观察组与对照组睡眠障碍均有改善,改善程度无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论 老年患者住院期间进行老年综合评估并结合多学科团队服务,可以及...     

Healthcare professional training: a comparison of geriatric competencies

Health professionals specializing in geriatrics are a unique but scarce resource who nevertheless play a critical role in shaping the care of older adults. An interdisciplinary didactic and clinical training milieu would have the potential to maximize training opportunities for geriatric healthcare professionals. The fact that little is known about the concordance between discipline-specific geriatric competencies hampers the creation of interdisciplinary geriatric training opportunities. Discipline-specific geriatric experts compared the geriatric competencies specified by geriatric-certifying bodies of five healthcare professions: dentistry, medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and social work. Overlap and differences in geriatric competencies across disciplines are presented, and opportunities and barriers to interdisciplinary geriatric education are discussed.     

住院患者老年综合评估规范及初步效果分析

目的：探讨在老年住院患者中进行老年综合评估（CGA）对于老年人全面综合管理的作用。方法制定标准的CGA流程,采用标准流程对北京协和医院老年病房2013年9月至2014年9月连续入院的≥65岁患者进行CGA,分析其筛查老年综合征的效果。结果标准化的评估流程便于临床使用,接受评估的179例患者中,年龄（72.5±8.1）岁。通过CGA发现,视力异常患者占62.0%,睡眠障碍41.3%,听力异常40.8%,慢性疼痛34.6%,跌倒25.7%,多重用药23.5%,便秘21.8%,抑郁焦虑18.4%,尿失禁16.2%,谵妄10.6%。以不同主诉入院的15例患者最终诊断为老年综合征,占8.4%。结论老年综合征在老年患者中普遍存在,运用标准化的CGA方法可以进行有效筛查,有利于老年患者的全人管理。     

A National Survey on the Effect of the Geriatric Academic Career Award in Advancing Academic Geriatric Medicine

A workforce that understands principles of geriatric medicine is critical to addressing the care needs of the growing elderly population. This will be impossible without a substantial increase in academicians engaged in education and aging research. Limited support of early‐career clinician–educators is a major barrier to attaining this goal. The Geriatric Academic Career Award (GACA) was a vital resource that benefitted 222 junior faculty members. GACA availability was interrupted in 2006, followed by permanent discontinuation after the Geriatrics Workforce Education Program (GWEP) subsumed it in 2015, leaving aspiring clinician–educators with no similar alternatives. GACA recipients were surveyed in this cross‐sectional, multimethod study to assess the effect of the award on career development, creation and dissemination of educational products, funding discontinuation consequences, and implications of program closure for the future of geriatric health care. Uninterrupted funding resulted in fulfillment of GACA goals (94%) and overall career success (96%). Collectively, awardees reached more than 40,700 learners. Funding interruption led to 55% working additional hours over and above an increased clinical workload to continue their GACA‐related research and scholarship. Others terminated GACA projects (36%) or abandoned academic medicine altogether. Of respondents currently at GWEP sites (43%), only 13% report a GWEP budget including GACA‐like support. Those with GWEP roles attributed their current standing to experience gained through GACA funding. These consequences are alarming and represent a major setback to academic geriatrics. GACA's singular contribution to the mission of geriatric medicine must prompt vigorous efforts to restore it as a distinct funding opportunity.     

The current state of geriatric medicine: a national survey of fellowship-trained geriatricians, 1990 to 1998

The rapid growth of the older population has focused national attention on the need for physicians trained in geriatric medicine. To gain insight into the evolving status of the field, with particular focus on career decision-making and academic career development of trainees, we conducted a survey of physicians recently completing geriatric fellowships. The 107 accredited extant geriatric fellowship programs in the United States and Puerto Rico were contacted to identify trainees from 1990 to 1998. A mailed survey addressed relevant career development and training issues. Four hundred ninety out of 787 (62%) physicians responded; 20% completed 1 year and 80% 2 or more years of training. Half made the decision to pursue a career in geriatrics during residency, 27% decided before/during medical school, and a mentor influenced 48%. Currently, 80% have a Certificate of Added Qualifications in geriatric medicine, 69% hold academic appointments, 78% teach, 39% participate in research, and 44% author publications. Most are doing predominantly clinical work in multiple settings. Further analysis of the 1996-to-1998 cohort revealed that those completing fellowships of 2 or more years are more likely to identify all geriatrics as their professional focus, conduct and author research, work with multidisciplinary teams, and participate in professional geriatric societies. This national survey documents career decision-making and the academic and clinical profiles of physicians completing geriatric fellowship training in the past decade. Longer fellowship training is associated with academic career development. Although there is a national need to train clinical geriatricians, the additional need to train and fund future geriatric academic leaders requires increased attention.     

Community Physicians' Knowledge on Basic Health Care for Elderly Persons in Israel: Comparing Findings From 2006 to 1996

Community physicians should be knowledgeable of basic geriatrics to cope with the challenges posed by the growing number of older patients and their complex needs. A survey of knowledge in basic health care for elderly persons, carried out by our team in 1996, revealed that it was insufficient. The authors repeated this survey in 2006, by using the same methodology, namely, a mailed questionnaire sent to 500 randomly sampled community physicians. No significant changes were found after this 10-year period. Likewise, no difference was evidenced between physicians that participated in geriatric training of any kind and those who did not. This lack of change requires health system leaders to coordinate their efforts and develop efficient teaching programs to prevent similar findings 10 years from now.     

National survey of geriatric medicine fellowship programs: comparing findings in 2006/07 and 2001/02 from the American Geriatrics Society and Association of Directors of Geriatric Academic Programs Geriatrics Workforce Policy Studies Center

This article documents the development of geriatric medicine fellowship training in the United States through 2009. Results from a national cross-sectional survey of all geriatric medicine fellowship training programs conducted in 2007 is compared with results from a similar survey in 2002. Secondary data sources were used to supplement the survey results. The 2007 survey response rate was 71%. Sixty-seven percent of responding programs directors have completed formal geriatric medicine fellowship training and are board certified in geriatrics, and 29% are board certified through the practice pathway. The number of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited fellowship programs has slowly increased, from 120 (23 family medicine (FM) and 97 internal medicine (IM)) in 2001/02 to 145 in 2008/09 (40 FM and 105 IM), resulting in a 21% increase in fellowship programs and a 13% increase in the number of first-year fellows (259 to 293). In 2008/09, the growth in programs and first-year slots, combined with the weak demand for geriatrics training, resulted in more than one-third of first-year fellow positions being unfilled. The number of advanced fellows decreased slightly from 72 in 2001/00 to 65 in 2006/07. In 2006/07, 55% of the advanced fellows were enrolled at four training programs. In 2008/09, 66% of fellows were international medical school graduates. The small numbers of graduating geriatric medicine fellows are insufficient to care for the expanding population of older frail patients, train other disciples in the care of complex older adults, conduct research in aging, and be leaders in the field.