| |
Centre for Policy on Ageing | |
 | |
|
To treat or not to treat
— issues in decisions not to treat older persons with cognitive impairment, depression, and incontinence | | Author(s) | Myrna Silverman, B Joan McDowell, Donald Musa |
| Journal title | Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol 45, no 9, September 1997 |
| Pages | pp 1094-1101 |
| Keywords | Cognitive impairment ; Depression ; Incontinence ; Medical care ; Social ethics ; Geriatric out-patients clinics ; United States of America. |
| Annotation | Although treatment was recommended for most problems relating to cognitive impairment, depression and/or incontinence experienced by the 128 older adults in this US study, more than a third of cognitive impairment and depression problems and nearly a half of incontinence did not receive treatment recommendations. Treatment rates varied considerably by condition and combination of comorbidity. Decisions not to treat are classified as follows: patient or family refused treatment; the assessment was not completed; an intervention was already in place; concurrent problems or comorbidities might have interfered with treatment; there was no documented diagnosis or there was a documented consideration and rule out of the problem; or no documented reason. Outpatient geriatric assessment units are designed to deal with the multiple problems experienced by their geriatric patients, with most problems presented identified successfully. However, the assessment process is complicated by multiple social, cultural, environmental, and medical factors. Clinicians must weigh up all medical and non-medical factors, including a patient's receptivity to treatment, when prioritising problems deemed treatable and in recommending treatment. (RH). |
| Accession Number | CPA-981127206 A |
| Classmark | E4: ENR: CTM: LK: TQ: L6G: 7T |
Data © Centre for Policy on Ageing |
|
| ...from the Ageinfo database published by Centre for Policy on Ageing. |
| |
|