Do elder emergency department patients and their informants agree about the elder's functioning?

Do elder emergency department patients and their informants agree about the elder's functioning?

Gerson L W; Blanda M; Dhingra P; Davis J M; Diaz S R

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

2001

2001-07

OBJECTIVE: To compare elder patients' and their informants' ratings of the elder's physical and mental function measured by a standard instrument, the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 12 (SF-12). METHODS: This was a randomized, cross-sectional study conducted at a university-affiliated community teaching hospital emergency department (census 65,000/year). Patients \textgreater69 years old, arriving on weekdays between 10 AM and 7 PM, able to engage in English conversation, and consenting to participate were eligible. Patients too ill to participate were excluded. Informants were people who accompanied and knew the patient. Elder patients were randomized 1:1 to receive an interview or questionnaire version of the SF-12. The questionnaire was read to people unable to read. Two trained medical students administered the instrument. The SF-12 algorithm was used to calculate physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component scores. Oral and written versions were compared using analysis of variance. The PCS and MCS scores between patient-informant pairs were compared with a matched t-test. Alpha was 0.05. RESULTS: One hundred six patients and 55 informants were enrolled. The patients' average (+/-SD) age was 77 +/- 5 years; 59 (56%; 95% CI = 46% to 65%) were women. There was no significant difference for mode of administration in PCS (p = 0.53) or MCS (p = 0.14) scores. Patients rated themselves higher on physical function than did their proxies. There was a 4.1 (95% CI = 99 to 7.2) point difference between patients' and their proxies' physical component scores (p = 0.01). Scores on the mental component were quite similar. The mean difference between patients and proxies was 0.49 (95% CI = 3.17 to 4.16). The half point higher rating by patients was not statistically significant (p = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Elders' self-ratings of physical function were higher than those of proxies who knew them. There was no difference in mental function ratings between patients and their proxies. Switching from informants' to patients' reports in evaluating elders' physical function in longitudinal studies may introduce error.

*Activities of Daily Living; *Attitude to Health; *Geriatric Assessment; *Health Status; *Self-Assessment; Aged; Bias; Cross-Sectional Studies; Emergency Service; Emergency Treatment/*methods/standards; Family/*psychology; Female; Hospital; Humans; Inpatients/*psychology; Interviews as Topic/*standards; Male; Medical History Taking/*methods/standards; Mental Health; Quality of Life; Surveys and Questionnaires/*standards

Article information provided for research and reference use only. All rights are retained by the journal listed under publisher and/or the creator(s).

721–724

7

8