Catherine Riffin1, Jennifer L Wolff2, Karl A Pillemer3. 1. Division of Geriatrics & Palliative Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA. 2. Department of Health Policy & Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Department of Human Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To characterize current practices, barriers, and facilitators to assessing and addressing family caregivers' needs and risks in primary care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, national mail-based survey. SETTING: American Medical Association Masterfile database. PARTICIPANTS: U.S. primary care physicians (N = 106), including general internists (n = 44) and geriatricians (n = 62). MEASUREMENTS: Approaches to assessing and addressing family caregivers' needs and risks; barriers and facilitators to conducting caregiver assessments. RESULTS: Few respondents reported conducting a formal caregiver assessment using a standardized instrument in the past year (10.5%). Informal, unstructured discussions about caregivers' needs and risks were common and encompassed a range of issues, most frequently caregivers' management of patients' safety (41.0%), ability to provide assistance (40.0%), and need for support (40.0%). To address caregiver needs, most respondents endorsed referring patients to services (e.g., adult day care, home care) (69.8%), assessing the appropriateness of the patient's living situation (67.9%), and referring caregivers to community agencies (63.2%). Lack of time was the most frequently cited barrier to assessing caregivers' needs (81.1%). The most commonly endorsed facilitators were access to better referral options (67.0%) and easier referral mechanisms (65.1%). Practice patterns, barriers, and facilitators to caregiver assessment did not differ by physician type. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians use informal, unstructured discussions rather than standardized instruments to assess caregivers' needs and risks. There is heterogeneity in the topics discussed and types of referrals made. Findings indicate the lack of translation of caregiver assessment tools from research to practice.
OBJECTIVES: To characterize current practices, barriers, and facilitators to assessing and addressing family caregivers' needs and risks in primary care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, national mail-based survey. SETTING: American Medical Association Masterfile database. PARTICIPANTS: U.S. primary care physicians (N = 106), including general internists (n = 44) and geriatricians (n = 62). MEASUREMENTS: Approaches to assessing and addressing family caregivers' needs and risks; barriers and facilitators to conducting caregiver assessments. RESULTS: Few respondents reported conducting a formal caregiver assessment using a standardized instrument in the past year (10.5%). Informal, unstructured discussions about caregivers' needs and risks were common and encompassed a range of issues, most frequently caregivers' management of patients' safety (41.0%), ability to provide assistance (40.0%), and need for support (40.0%). To address caregiver needs, most respondents endorsed referring patients to services (e.g., adult day care, home care) (69.8%), assessing the appropriateness of the patient's living situation (67.9%), and referring caregivers to community agencies (63.2%). Lack of time was the most frequently cited barrier to assessing caregivers' needs (81.1%). The most commonly endorsed facilitators were access to better referral options (67.0%) and easier referral mechanisms (65.1%). Practice patterns, barriers, and facilitators to caregiver assessment did not differ by physician type. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians use informal, unstructured discussions rather than standardized instruments to assess caregivers' needs and risks. There is heterogeneity in the topics discussed and types of referrals made. Findings indicate the lack of translation of caregiver assessment tools from research to practice.
Authors: Catherine Riffin; Jennifer L Wolff; Matthew Estill; Sheela Prabhu; Karl A Pillemer Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-03-13 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Ryan Ruiz; Seema Jeswani; Kenneth Andrews; Benjamin Rafii; Benjamin C Paul; Ryan C Branski; Milan R Amin Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Courtney H Van Houtven; Jessica E Ma; Janet Grubber; Megan Shepherd-Banigan; Katherine Lewis; Leah Christensen; Colleen Richardson; Margaret Kabat; Kasey Decosimo; Katherine E M Miller; Cynthia J Coffman; Teri Malo; Kelli D Allen; S Nicole Hastings Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-05-03 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Zainab Toteh Osakwe; Charles Senteio; Omonigho Michael Bubu; Chinedu Obioha; Arlener D Turner; Sujata Thawani; Rose Saint Fleur-Calixte; Girardin Jean-Louis Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Jasneet Parmar; Sharon Anderson; Marjan Abbasi; Saeed Ahmadinejad; Karenn Chan; Lesley Charles; Bonnie Dobbs; Amandeep Sheny Khera; Jennifer Stickney-Lee; Peter George J Tian; Suvidha Jain Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-23 Impact factor: 3.390