Can we make Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) person-centred? A Quality Improvement Project using the CGA-Questionnaire

Poster ID
2877
Authors' names
K Chin; G Watson; A Paveley; H Dulson; L Thompson; R Schiff
Author's provenances
1. Department of Ageing and Health, Guy's and St Thomas' Trust; 2. NHS Lothian; 3. Honorary reader, King's College London
Conditions

Abstract

Introduction:

CGA is the gold-standard intervention for older adults living with frailty. A challenge is providing person-centred, time-efficient CGA. The CGA-questionnaire (CGA-Q) aims to facilitate person-centred CGA, allowing patients/carers to highlight concerns. We describe a two-site multi-cycle QIP implementing the CGA-Q.

Methods:

CGA-Q is a 19-item questionnaire covering seven CGA domains. It was adapted from the validated CGA-GOLD questionnaire. Between March 2023-June 2024, CGA-Q was established in a London and Scottish NHS Trust using ‘Plan-Do-Study-Act’ methodology. Cycle 1-3 involved designing and establishing CGA-Q at one London geriatric clinic. Cycle 4 assessed feasibility in multiple London geriatric clinics. Cycle 5 examined implementation of CGA-Q in a Scottish day-hospital. Person-centredness refers to inclusion of person-selected concerns in clinic letters, and not including person-excluded concerns.

Results:

Across cycles, cohorts were comparable in age, sex, frailty and cognitive status. In cycles 1-3 (n=174), CGA-Q completion rates improved from 39% to 83%. More CGA-Q questions were addressed especially cognition, mood, continence and falls. Inclusion of person-selected concerns increased from 60% to 70%; exclusion of person-excluded concerns remained ~70%. In cycle 4, completion rates varied by clinic: renal-CGA 100% (12/12); CGA 42% (13/31); bone-health 14% (10/60). >50% of questionnaires were completed by patients, except in bone-health where two-thirds were completed by staff. Staff feedback highlights CGA-Q is a useful discussion prompt. In cycle 5 (n=41), a similar breadth of CGA-Q questions were addressed among respondents compared to baseline. With CGA-Q, continence and pain were addressed more frequently. Inclusion of person-selected concerns was 62%; exclusion of person-excluded concerns was 71%.

Conclusion:

CGA-Q has been successfully implemented across multiple sites and clinics. It can improve person-centeredness and breadth of CGA, but early results vary across subspecialty geriatric medicine clinics with their unique processes. Ongoing work will determine the experience of patients and carers of this approach.

Comments

Thanks for sharing this interesting research. Can you please clarify what you meant by not including person-excluded concerns from letters? can you give me an example please?

Thank you

Submitted by Mrs Ruth Bryant on

Permalink

Hi Ruth

Thank you for reading our poster. 

person excluded concerns were those the patient/carer had said they didn't;t have any concerns or didn't want to address. So as 70% of these were omitted it means 30% were discussed suggesting the clinicians still felt these areas were important enough to attempt to discuss and address them e.g sometimes the clinical explored medication compliance when the person said they had no issues.

hope that helps

Do contact us is we can help further

Rebekah

Rebekah.Schiff@gstt.nhs.uk

 

Submitted by Dr Rebekah Schiff on

In reply to by Mrs Ruth Bryant

Permalink