Ana Rita Ferreira, Cláudia Camila Dias, Lia Fernandes
Abstract
Unmet needs are becoming acknowledged as better predictors of the worst prognostic outcomes than common measures of functional or cognitive decline. Their accurate assessment is a pivotal component of effective care delivery, particularly in institutionalized care where little is known about the needs of its residents, many of whom suffer from dementia and show complex needs. The aims of this study were to describe the needs of an institutionalized sample and to analyze its relationship with demographic and clinical characteristics. A cross-sectional study was conducted with a sample from three nursing homes. All residents were assessed with a comprehensive protocol that included Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) and Adults and Older Adults Functional Inventory (IAFAI). To identify needs, the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) was used. The final sample included 175 residents with a mean age of 81 standard deviation (SD = 10) years. From these, 58.7% presented cognitive deficit (MMSE) and 45.2% depressive symptoms (GDS). Statistically significant negative correlations were found between MMSE score and met (r s = -0.425), unmet (r s = -0.369) and global needs (r s = -0.565). Data also showed significant correlations between depressive symptoms and unmet (r s = 0.683) and global needs (r s = 0.407), and between behavioral and psychological symptoms (BPSD) and unmet (r s = 0.181) and global needs (r s = 0.254). Finally, significant correlations between functional impairment and met (r s = 0.642), unmet (r s = 0.505) and global needs (r s = 0.796) were also found. These results suggest that in this sample, more unmet needs are associated with the worst outcomes measured. This is consistent with previous findings and seems to demonstrate that the needs of those institutionalized elderly remain under-diagnosed and untreated.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 September 2018.
All research outputs
#6,973,607
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,545
of 4,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,559
of 299,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#39
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
