Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/105750
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMuscat, Francesca-
dc.contributor.authorCamilleri, Liberato-
dc.contributor.authorAttard, Conrad-
dc.contributor.authorLungaro-Mifsud, Stephen-
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-30T14:50:37Z-
dc.date.available2023-01-30T14:50:37Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationMuscat, F., Camilleri, L., Attard, C., & Lungaro Mifsud, S. (2023). Assessment Tools for the Admission of Older Adults to Inpatient Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(3), 919.en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/105750-
dc.description.abstract(1) Objective: To identify the assessment tools and outcome measures used to assess older adults for inpatient rehabilitation. (2) Design: Scoping review. (3) Data sources: ProQuest, PEDro, PubMed, CINAHL Plus with full text (EBSCO), Cochrane Library and reference lists from included studies. (4) Review method: The inclusion of studies covering patients aged >60, focusing on rehabilitation assessments delivered in hospitals in community settings. Studies reporting on rehabilitation specifically designed for older adults—testing for at least one domain that affects rehabilitation or assessments for admission to inpatient rehabilitation—were also included. Results were described both quantitatively and narratively. (5) Results: 1404 articles were identified through selected databases and registers, and these articles underwent a filtering process intended to identify and remove any duplicates. This process reduced the number to 1186 articles. These, in turn, were screened for inclusion criteria, as a result of which 37 articles were included in the final review. The majority of assessments for geriatric rehabilitation were carried out by a multidisciplinary team. Multiple studies considered more than one domain during assessment, with a high percentage evaluating a specific outcome measure used in geriatric rehabilitation. The most common domains assessed were function, cognition and medical status—with communication, vision and pain being the least common. A total of 172 outcome measures were identified in this review, with MMSE, BI, FIM and CCI being the most frequent. (6) Conclusions: This review highlights the lack of standardised approaches in existing assessment processes. Generally, older-adult-rehabilitation assessments struggle to capture rehabilitation potential in a holistic manner. Hence, a predictive model of rehabilitation for assessing patients at the initial stages would be useful in planning a patient-specific programme aimed at maximising functional independence and, thus, quality of life.en_GB
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherMDPI AGen_GB
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_GB
dc.subjectRehabilitation -- Researchen_GB
dc.subjectOutcome assessment (Medical care) -- Statistical methodsen_GB
dc.subjectOlder people -- Case studiesen_GB
dc.subjectBehavior therapy for older peopleen_GB
dc.titleAssessment tools for the admission of older adults to inpatient rehabilitation : a scoping reviewen_GB
dc.typearticleen_GB
dc.rights.holderThe copyright of this work belongs to the author(s)/publisher. The rights of this work are as defined by the appropriate Copyright Legislation or as modified by any successive legislation. Users may access this work and can make use of the information contained in accordance with the Copyright Legislation provided that the author must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the prior permission of the copyright holderen_GB
dc.description.reviewedpeer-revieweden_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/jcm12030919-
dc.publication.titleJournal of Clinical Medicineen_GB
Appears in Collections:Scholarly Works - FacSciSOR

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Assessment_tools_for_the_admission_of_older_adults_to_inpatient_rehabilitation.pdf397.79 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.