Skip to main content

Table 5 Team members and services received on wards

From: Comprehensive geriatric assessment pilot of a randomized control study in a Swedish acute hospital: a feasibility study

  Intervention
n = 16
Control
n = 14
Mean difference CI**
Medical doctor, n (%) 16 (100) 14 (100)
Nursing, n (%) 16 (100) 14 (100)
OT assessment, n (%) 14 (88) 1 (7) −0.80 (−1.06,-0.57)
OT assistive devices*, n (%) 14 (88) 2 (14) −0.73 (−1.00,-0.47)
PT assessment, n (%) 13 (81) 10 (71) −0.10 (−0.42, 0.23)
PT assistive devices*, n (%) 13 (81) 10 (71) −0.10 (−0.42, 0.23)
Nutritionist, n (%) 3 (19) 1 (7) −0.12 (−0.38, 0.14)
Social Worker, n (%) 1 (6) 0 (0) −0.63 (−0.20, 0.08)
Discharge plan, n (%) 16 (100) 11 (79) −0.21 (−0.43, 0.00)
Care planning meeting***, n (%) 8 (50) 2 (14) −0.36 (−0.70,-0.02)
  1. *Assistive devices entails: needs assessment, training with, arranging for use of on the ward and or at discharge
  2. **95% confidence intervals (CI)
  3. ***Care planning meeting: ward staff, municipality home health services and patient planning of services required after discharge