Tony Rosen1, Alyssa Elman1, Sarah Dion2, Diana Delgado3, Michelle Demetres3, Risa Breckman4, Kristin Lees5, Kim Dash5, Debi Lang6, Alice Bonner7,8, Jason Burnett9, Carmel B Dyer9, Rani Snyder10, Amy Berman10, Terry Fulmer10, Mark S Lachs4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College/NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York. 2. University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio. 3. Samuel J. Wood Library and C.V. Starr Biomedical Information Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 4. Division of Geriatrics and Palliative Care, Weill Cornell Medical College/NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York. 5. Education Development Center, Waltham, MA, USA. 6. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts. 7. School of Nursing, Bouve College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA. 8. Executive Office of Elder Affairs, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Boston, MA, USA. 9. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Medical School, Houston, TX, USA. 10. The John A. Hartford Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Elder mistreatment is common and has serious social and medical consequences for victims. Though programs to combat this mistreatment have been developed and implemented for more than three decades, previous systematic literature reviews have found few successful ones. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a more comprehensive examination of programs to improve elder mistreatment identification, intervention, or prevention, including those that had not undergone evaluation. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO Elton B. Stephens Co. (EBSCO), AgeLine, CINAHL. MEASUREMENTS: We abstracted key information about each program and categorized programs into 14 types and 9 subtypes. For programs that reported an impact evaluation, we systematically assessed the study quality. We also systematically examined the potential for programs to be successfully implemented in environments with limited resources available. RESULTS: We found 116 articles describing 115 elder mistreatment programs. Of these articles, 43% focused on improving prevention, 50% focused on identification, and 95% focused on intervention, with 66% having multiple foci. The most common types of program were: educational (53%), multidisciplinary team (MDT) (21%), psychoeducation/therapy/counseling (15%), and legal services/support (8%). Of the programs, 13% integrated an acute-care hospital, 43% had high potential to work in low-resource environments, and 57% reported an attempt to evaluate program impact, but only 2% used a high-quality study design. CONCLUSION: Many programs to combat elder mistreatment have been developed and implemented, with the majority focusing on education and MDT development. Though more than half reported evaluation of program impact, few used high-quality study design. Many have the potential to work in low-resource environments. Acute-care hospitals were infrequently integrated into programs.
BACKGROUND: Elder mistreatment is common and has serious social and medical consequences for victims. Though programs to combat this mistreatment have been developed and implemented for more than three decades, previous systematic literature reviews have found few successful ones. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a more comprehensive examination of programs to improve elder mistreatment identification, intervention, or prevention, including those that had not undergone evaluation. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO Elton B. Stephens Co. (EBSCO), AgeLine, CINAHL. MEASUREMENTS: We abstracted key information about each program and categorized programs into 14 types and 9 subtypes. For programs that reported an impact evaluation, we systematically assessed the study quality. We also systematically examined the potential for programs to be successfully implemented in environments with limited resources available. RESULTS: We found 116 articles describing 115 elder mistreatment programs. Of these articles, 43% focused on improving prevention, 50% focused on identification, and 95% focused on intervention, with 66% having multiple foci. The most common types of program were: educational (53%), multidisciplinary team (MDT) (21%), psychoeducation/therapy/counseling (15%), and legal services/support (8%). Of the programs, 13% integrated an acute-care hospital, 43% had high potential to work in low-resource environments, and 57% reported an attempt to evaluate program impact, but only 2% used a high-quality study design. CONCLUSION: Many programs to combat elder mistreatment have been developed and implemented, with the majority focusing on education and MDT development. Though more than half reported evaluation of program impact, few used high-quality study design. Many have the potential to work in low-resource environments. Acute-care hospitals were infrequently integrated into programs.
Authors: Charles P Mouton; Rebecca J Rodabough; Susan L D Rovi; Julie L Hunt; Melissa A Talamantes; Robert G Brzyski; Sandra K Burge Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Fuad Abujarad; Davis Ulrich; Chelsea Edwards; Esther Choo; Michael V Pantalon; Karen Jubanyik; James Dziura; Gail D'Onofrio; Thomas M Gill Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-02-21 Impact factor: 7.538