Assessment of appropriateness of screening community-dwelling older people to prevent functional decline

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 42-50

  Drewes, Yvonne M ^a   Gussekloo, Jacobijn ^a   Van Der Meer, Victor ^a   Rigter, Henk ^b   Dekker, Janny H ^c   Goumans, Marleen J B M ^d   Metsemakers, Job F M ^e   Van Overbeek, Riki ^f   De Rooij, Sophia E ^g   Schers, Henk J ^h   Schuurmans, Marieke J ⁱ   Sturmans, Ferd ^b   De Vries, Kerst ^j   Westendorp, Rudi G J ^a   Wind, Annet W ^a   Assendelft, Willem J J ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^d ROTTERDAM UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

^e MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^f Vilans   (Netherlands)

^g UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^h RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^j VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

more..

Author keywords

elderly; primary care; public health; screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CIGARETTE SMOKING; DETERIORATION; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SCREENING;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; GERIATRIC ASSESSMENT; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PSYCHOMOTOR DISORDERS;

EID: 84855824904     PISSN: 00028614     EISSN: 15325415     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03775.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Klein WC, Bloom M,. Successful Aging: Strategies for Healthy Living. New York: Plenum Press, 1997.
2. Infeld DL, Whitelaw N,. Policy initiatives to promote healthy aging. Clin Geriatr Med 2002; 18: 627-642.
3. Oliver M,. Let's not turn elderly people into patients. BMJ 2009; 338: b873.
4. Clarfield AM,. Screening in frail older people: An ounce of prevention or a pound of trouble? J Am Geriatr Soc 2010; 58: 2016-2021.
5. Dutch College of General Practitioners. [Practice Guidelines from the Dutch College of General Practitioners 2009]. Utrecht: Dutch College of General Practitioners, 2008.
6. van der Ploeg E, Depla MF, Shekelle P, et al. Developing quality indicators for general practice care for vulnerable elders: Transfer from US to the Netherlands. Qual Saf Health Care 2008; 17: 291-295.
7. Bakker E, Jaspers N, Kraakman M, et al. [Preventive Health Care Centers for Older People, Guidebook]. Utrecht: Vilans, the Knowledge Centre on Ageing, 2008.
8. Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement. Preventive Services for Adults, 14th Ed. Bloomington, MN: Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, 2008.
9. Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement. Primary Prevention of Chronic Disease Risk Factors, 1st Ed. Bloomington, MN: Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, 2008.
10. RAND Corporation. Assessing the Care of Vulnerable Elders, Potential Quality Indicators and Literature Review, ACOVE-3. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2006.
11. UK National Screening Committee. Second Report of the UK National Screening Committee. London: Department of Health, 2000.
12. Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality. The Guide to Clinical Preventive Services 2008, Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Rockville, MD: Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality, 2008.
13. The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Guidelines for Preventive Activities in General Practice, 6th Ed. South Melbourne: The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, 2005.
14. Swedish National Institute of Public Health. Healthy Ageing: A Challenge for Europe. Stockholm: Swedish National Institute of Public Health, 2007.
15. Division of Ageing and Seniors, Public Health Agency of Canada. Healthy Aging in Canada: A New Vision, a Vital Investment. from Evidence to Action. A background paper for the Federal, Provincial and Territorial Committee of Officials (Seniors). Ottawa: Division of Aging and Seniors, Public Health Agency of Canada, 2006.
16. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Healthy Aging: Improving and Extending Quality of Life Among Older Americans, at a Glance 2010. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 2010.
17. Prime Minister's Science Engineering and Innovation Council. Promoting Healthy Ageing in Australia. Canberra: Prime Minister's Science Engineering and Innovation Council. 2003.
18. Health Council of the Netherlands. [Prevention in the Elderly: Focus on Functioning in Daily Life], 2009/07 Ed. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, 2009.
19. Holland WW, Stewart S, Masseria C,. Policy Brief: Screening in Europe. Brussels: World Health Organization, on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, 2006.
20. Brook RH, Chassin MR, Fink A, et al. A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1986; 2: 53-63.
21. Brook RH,. Assessing the appropriateness of care-Its time has come. JAMA 2009; 302: 997-998.
22. Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User's Manual. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2001.
23. Wilson JMG, Jungner G,. Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1968.
24. Depp CA, Jeste DV,. Definitions and predictors of successful aging: A comprehensive review of larger quantitative studies. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2006; 14: 6-20.
25. Manton KG,. Recent declines in chronic disability in the elderly U.S. population: Risk factors and future dynamics. Annu Rev Public Health 2008; 29: 91-113.
26. Rockwood K, Fox RA, Stolee P, et al. Frailty in elderly people: An evolving concept. Can Med Assoc J 1994; 150: 489-495.
27. Shekelle PG, Kahan JP, Bernstein SJ, et al. The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 1888-1895.
28. Hemingway H, Crook AM, Feder G, et al. Underuse of coronary revascularization procedures in patients considered appropriate candidates for revascularization. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 645-654.
29. Merrick NJ, Fink A, Park RE, et al. Derivation of clinical indications for carotid endarterectomy by an expert panel. Am J Public Health 1987; 77: 187-190.
30. Shekelle P,. The appropriateness method. Med Decis Making 2004; 24: 228-231.
31. Rigter H, Meijler AP, McDonnell J, et al. Indications for coronary revascularisation: A Dutch perspective. Heart 1997; 77: 211-218.
32. McGory ML, Shekelle PG, Ko CY,. Development of quality indicators for patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98: 1623-1633.
33. de Ruijter W, Westendorp RG, Assendelft WJ, et al. Use of Framingham risk score and new biomarkers to predict cardiovascular mortality in older people: Population based observational cohort study. BMJ 2009; 338: a3083.
34. Jong-Gierveld J, Kamphuis F,. The development of a Rasch-type loneliness scale. Applied Psychol Measure 1985; 9: 289-299.
35. Burgers JS, Grol R, Klazinga NS, et al. Towards evidence-based clinical practice: An international survey of 18 clinical guideline programs. Int J Qual Health Care 2003; 15: 31-45.
36. AGREE Collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: The AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care 2003; 12: 18-23.
37. Cardol M, van Dijk L, de Jong JD, et al. [Second National Study into Diseases and Activities in General Practice. Primary Care: What Does the Gatekeeper Do?]. Utrecht/Bilthoven: NIVEL/RIVM, 2004.
38. Nelson HD, Haney EM, Dana T, et al. Screening for osteoporosis: An update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2010; 153: 99-111.
39. Kahan JP, Park RE, Leape LL, et al. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Med Care 1996; 34: 512-523.
40. Tobacman JK, Scott IU, Cyphert S, et al. Reproducibility of measures of overuse of cataract surgery by three physician panels. Med Care 1999; 37: 937-945.