Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The potential impact of multidimesional geriatric assessment in the social security system

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy of multidimensional geriatric assessment (MGA/CGA) in patients over 65 years old in predicting the release of the accompaniment allowance (AA) indemnity by a Local Medico-Legal Committee (MLC-NHS) and by the National Institute of Social Security Committee (MLC-INPS).

Methods

In a longitudinal observational study, 200 Italian elder citizens requesting AA were first evaluated by MLC-NHS and later by MLC-INPS. Only MLC-INPS performed a MGA/CGA (including SPMSQ, Barthel Index, GDS-SF, and CIRS). This report was written according to the STROBE guidelines.

Results

The data analysis was performed on January 2016. The evaluation by the MLC-NHS and by the MLC-INPS was in agreement in 66% of cases. In the 28%, the AA benefit was recognized by the MLC-NHS, but not by the MLC-INPS. By the multivariate analysis, the best predictors of the AA release, by the MLC-NHS, were represented by gender and the Barthel Index score. The presence of carcinoma, the Barthel Index score, and the SPMQ score were the best predictors for the AA release by MLC-INPS.

Conclusions

MGA/CGA could be useful in saving financial resources reducing the risk of incorrect indemnity release. It can improve the accuracy of the impairment assessment in social security system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beard JR, Officer A, de Carvalho IA et al (2016) The World report on ageing and health: a policy framework for healthy ageing. Lancet 387:2145–2154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00516-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pammolli F, Riccaboni M, Magazzini L (2012) The sustainability of European health care systems: beyond income and aging. Eur J Health Econ 13:623–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-011-0337-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Christensen K, Doblhammer G, Rau R et al (2009) Ageing populations: the challenges ahead. Lancet 374:1196–1208. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61460-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Olshansky SJ, Antonucci T, Berkman L et al (2012) Differences in life expectancy due to race and educational differences are widening, and many may not catch up. Health Aff 31:1803–1813. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Eurostat (2015) The Ageing Report 2015. Underlying Assumptions and Projection Methodologies. European Economy 8|2014. http://europa.eu/epc/pdf/ageing_report_2015_en.pdf. Accessed 07 July 2017

  6. ISTAT (2015) Popolazione e famiglie. Annuario Statistico Italiano, pp 71–108. http://www.istat.it/it/files/2015/12/Asi-2015.pdf. Accessed 09 Aug 2017

  7. World Health Organization (2015) Health in older age. World report on ageing and health. WHO, Luxembourg pp 43–88

    Google Scholar 

  8. Legislative Decree of 23 November 1988, n. 509, on Amendments of the Decree-Law Art. 2 n. 118 of 30 March 1971 on “Standards for the review of the categories of disabilities and disabling diseases, as well as the benefits provided by the legislation in force for the same categories”

  9. Law no. 18, Article 1, of 11 February 1980, on “Accompaniment Allowance to totally disabled invalids”

  10. Law no. 508 Article 1, comma. 2, letter b of 21 November 1988, on “Supplementary rules on economic assistance to disabled civilians, the civilian blind and deaf”

  11. Law no. 102, art. 20, of 3 August 2009 on “Fight against fraud in the field of disability support”

  12. Pfeiffer E (1975) A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 23:433–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1975.tb00927.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Malhotra C, Chan A, Matchar D et al (2013) Diagnostic performance of Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire for screening dementia among patients attending cognitive assessment clinics in Singapore. Ann Acad Med Singapore 42:315–319

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Granger CV, Dewis LS, Peters NC et al (1979) Stroke rehabilitation: analysis of repeated Barthel index measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 60:14–17

    Google Scholar 

  15. Alden D, Austin C, Sturgeon R (1989) A correlation between the geriatric depression scale long and short forms. J Gerontol 44:124–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Parmelee PA, Thuras PD, Katz IR et al (1995) Validation of the cumulative illness rating scale in a geriatric residential population. J Am Geriatr Soc 43:130–137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gallo V, Egger M, McCormack V et al (2012) STrengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology—molecular epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement. Eur J Clin Invest 2:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2362.2011.02561.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Erkinjuntti T, Sulkava R, Wikstrom J et al (1987) Short portable mental status questionnaire as a screening test for dementia and delirium among the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 35:412–416

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Albert M, Smith LA, Scherr PA et al (1991) Use of brief cognitive tests to identify individuals in the community with clinically diagnosed Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Neurosci. 57:167–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B (1989) Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol 42:703–709

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hsueh IP, Lee MM, Hsieh CL (2001) Psychometric characteristics of the Barthel activities of daily living index in stroke patients. J Formos Med Assoc 100:526–532

    Google Scholar 

  22. Leung SO, Chan CC, Shah S (2007) Development of a Chinese version of the modified Barthel Index. Clin Rehabil 21:912–922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sainsbury A, Seebass G, Bansal A et al (2005) Reliability of the Barthel when used with older people. Age Ageing 34:228–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. [No authors listed] (1988) National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: geriatric assessment methods for clinical decision-making. J Am Geriatr Soc 36:342–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rubenstein LZ (2004) Joseph T. Freeman award lecture: comprehensive geriatric assessment: from miracle to reality. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 59(5):473–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ekdahl AW, Sjöstrand F, Ehrenberg A et al (2015) Frailty and comprehensive geriatric assessment organized as CGA-ward or CGA-consult for older adult patients in the acute care setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Geriatr Med 6:523–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurger.2015.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ellis G, Whitehead MA, Robinson D et al (2011) Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 343:d6553. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d6553

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Baztán JJ, Suárez-García FM, López-Arrieta J et al (2009) Effectiveness of acute geriatric units on functional decline, living at home, and case fatality among older patients admitted to hospital for acute medical disorders: meta-analysis. BMJ 338:b50. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b50

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Ekdahl AW, Wirehn AB, Alwin J et al (2015) Costs and effects of an ambulatory geriatric unit (the AGe-FIT Study): a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Dir Assoc 16:497–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2015.01.074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Graziamaria Corbi and Immacolata Ambrosino have contributed equally to the article.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine and Health Sciences “V. Tiberio”, University of Molise, Via De Sanctis snc, 86100, Campobasso, Italy

    Graziamaria Corbi

  2. Operative Unit INPS of Bari 2, Bari, Italy

    Immacolata Ambrosino & Sirio Simplicio

  3. Regional Coordination Office INPS of Puglia, Bari, Italy

    Marco Massari & Michele Dragone

  4. National General Coordination Office INPS, Rome, Italy

    Onofrio De Lucia & Massimo Piccioni

  5. Department of Medical, Surgical, Neurological, Aging and Metabolic Sciences, University of Campania “L. Vanvitelli”, Naples, Italy

    Giuseppe Paolisso

  6. Department of Translational Medical Sciences, Federico II University of Naples, Naples, Italy

    Nicola Ferrara

  7. Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Campania “L. Vanvitelli”, Naples, Italy

    Carlo Pietro Campobasso

Authors
  1. Graziamaria Corbi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Immacolata Ambrosino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Massari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Onofrio De Lucia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sirio Simplicio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michele Dragone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Giuseppe Paolisso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Massimo Piccioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Nicola Ferrara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Carlo Pietro Campobasso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Graziamaria Corbi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that there are no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The study was in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2013. The Ethics Committee of Molise University approved the protocol.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients included.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Corbi, G., Ambrosino, I., Massari, M. et al. The potential impact of multidimesional geriatric assessment in the social security system. Aging Clin Exp Res 30, 1225–1232 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0889-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0889-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation