Comprehensive geriatric assessment in primary care: a systematic review

• Published in: Aging clinical and experimental research 2020-02, Vol.32 (2), p.197-205
• Main Authors: Garrard, James W., Cox, Natalie J., Dodds, Richard M., Roberts, Helen C., Sayer, Avan A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Bias; Biomedical research; Clinical outcomes; Frailty; Geriatrics; Geriatrics/Gerontology; Hospitals; Intervention; Medical research; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Mortality; Nurse practitioners; Older people; Population; Primary care; Review; Studies; Systematic review
• ISSN: 1720-8319; 1594-0667; 1720-8319
• DOI: 10.1007/s40520-019-01183-w

Background Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) involves the multidimensional assessment and management of an older person. It is well described in hospital and home-based settings. A novel approach could be to perform CGA within primary healthcare, the initial community located healthcare setting for patients, improving accessibility to a co-located multidisciplinary team. Aim To appraise the evidence on CGA implemented within the primary care practice. Methods The review followed PRISMA recommendations. Eligible studies reported CGA on persons aged ≥ 65 in a primary care practice. Studies focusing on a single condition were excluded. Searches were run in five databases; reference lists and publications were screened. Two researchers independently screened for eligibility and assessed study quality. All study outcomes were reviewed. Results The authors screened 9003 titles, 145 abstracts and 97 full texts. Four studies were included. Limited study bias was observed. Studies were heterogeneous in design and reported outcomes. CGAs were led by a geriatrician ( n  = 3) or nurse practitioner ( n  = 1), with varied length and extent of follow-up (12–48 months). Post-intervention hospital admission rates showed mixed results, with improved adherence to medication modifications. No improvement in survival or functional outcomes was observed. Interventions were widely accepted and potentially cost-effective. Discussion The four studies demonstrated that CGA was acceptable and provided variable outcome benefit. Further research is needed to identify the most effective strategy for implementing CGA in primary care. Particular questions include identification of patients suitable for CGA within primary care CGA, a consensus list of outcome measures, and the role of different healthcare professionals in delivering CGA.