Program of Intensive Support in Emergency Departments for Care Partners of Cognitively Impaired Patients: Protocol for a Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Older adults with cognitive impairment have more emergency department visits and 30-day readmissions and are more likely to die after visiting the emergency department than people without cognitive impairment. Emergency department providers frequently do not identify cognitive impairment. Use of cognitive screening tools, along with better understanding of root causes for emergency department visits, could equip health care teams with the knowledge needed to develop individually tailored care management strategies for post-emergency department care. By identifying and directly addressing patients' and informal caregivers' (or care partners') psychosocial and health care needs, such strategies could reduce the need for repeat acute care. We have used the terms "caregiver" and "care partner" interchangeably. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the protocol for a randomized controlled trial of a new care management intervention, the Program of Intensive Support in Emergency Departments for Care Partners of Cognitively Impaired Patients (POISED) trial, compared with usual care. We described the research design, intervention, outcome measures, data collection techniques, and analysis plans. METHODS: Emergency department patients who were aged ≥75 years and screened positive for cognitive impairment via either the Mini-Cog or the proxy-reported Short Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, with a planned discharge to home, were recruited to participate with their identified informal (family or friend) caregiver in the 2-site POISED randomized controlled trial at New York University Langone Health and Indiana University. The intervention group received 6 months of care management from the POISED Care Team of registered nurses and specialty-trained paraprofessionals, who perform root cause analyses, administer standardized assessments, provide advice, recommend appropriate referrals, and, when applicable, implement dementia-specific comorbid condition protocols. The control group received care as recommended at emergency department discharge (usual care) and were given information about resources for further cognitive assessment. The primary outcome is repeat emergency department use; secondary outcomes include caregiver activation for patient health care management, caregiver depression, anxiety, and experience of social support as important predisposing and time-varying enabling and need characteristics. Data were collected from questionnaires and patients' electronic health records. RESULTS: Recruitment was conducted between March 2018 and May 2021. Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented to peer audiences, decision makers, stakeholders, and other interested persons. CONCLUSIONS: The POISED intervention is a promising approach to tailoring care management based on root causes for emergency department admission of patients with cognitive impairment with the aim of reducing readmissions. This trial will provide insights for caregivers and emergency department and primary care providers on appropriate, personalized, and proactive treatment plans for older adults with cognitive impairment. The findings will be relevant to audiences concerned with quality of life for individuals with cognitive impairment and their caregivers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03325608; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03325608. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/36607.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".