Gerontorheumatology: the challenge to meet health-care demands for the elderly with musculoskeletal conditions

W. van Lankveld, M. Franssen and A. Stenger

Sint Maartenskliniek, Department of Rheumatology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Correspondence to: W. van Lankveld, Sint Maartenskliniek Research, P.O. Box 9011, 6500 GM Nijmegen, The Netherlands. E-mail: w.vanlankveld{at}maartenskliniek.nl

The aim of this editorial is to keep the needs of the elderly with musculoskeletal conditions a rheumatological priority. The number of older patients with musculoskeletal conditions will double in the near future. Pitfalls in diagnostics will be described, as well as possible limitations in treatment. These difficulties in diagnostics and treatment underline the need for specific attention for this group of patients. The gerontorheumatological outpatient service in the Netherlands is described, as an example of a way in which special attention to the problems of the elderly with musculoskeletal conditions is given. Experimental studies on the effect of gerontorheumatological interventions are non-existent. Therefore, evidence from geriatric studies showing the positive effect of similar services for the frail elderly is given. Finally, important topics in future research on gerontorheumatology are suggested.

In Western society, the percentage of elderly people in the population has increased dramatically during recent decades and is likely to increase further in the coming decades. Many elderly patients are functioning well without any assistance. However, a large proportion of older people are confronted with one or more disabilities [1]. Musculoskeletal conditions are the most frequently reported disorders in the elderly in the community [2–5]. Because the number of people over 65 is likely to increase in the Western population, it is estimated that the number of older patients with musculoskeletal conditions will double in the coming decades [6, 7].

As a result, rheumatology will be challenged to meet the health-care demands of increasing numbers of patients. Furthermore, the number of elderly patients with complex rheumatological conditions in need of specialized care will also increase [8]. There is a lack of attention for this group of patients, as existing special care for the elderly is most often focused on patients with primarily cognitive problems [9].

Due to the low incidence of rheumatic conditions in an average general practice, as well as the complexity of these conditions, the general practitioner may experience difficulties in diagnostics and treatment of the symptoms presented [10, 11]. The rheumatologist seems most able to address the problems of these patients. Rheumatology is a specialism rooted in internal medicine; therefore the rheumatologist is not only able to diagnose and treat the patient's medical condition but is also able to take the wider consequences of the disease into account.

Symptom presentation, disease manifestation and comorbidity in older people can pose diagnostic problems. Presented symptoms may be the result of a wide range of musculoskeletal, endocrine, metabolic, traumatic and psychological conditions [12, 13]. Furthermore, intellectual and cognitive function in some patients may be impaired, affecting the ability of the patient to communicate symptoms.

Disease manifestations may pose another diagnostic problem. The incidence and prevalence of some musculoskeletal conditions increases with age. However, the clinical picture and diseases manifestations of some well-known conditions can differ depending on the age of onset [14, 15]. On the other hand, longstanding conditions may pose new problems as the patient gets older. For instance, ankylosing spondylitis is unlikely to become manifest at an older age [3]. However, the impact of this condition may increase with age due to the slow progression of impairment over time. As a result, some older patients may be confronted with new limitations when they get older.

Finally, comorbidity may interfere with accurate diagnostics. Only in recent years has comorbidity in the musculoskeletal conditions received proper attention. Comorbidity in the population of patients with rheumatic diseases is high. At least 50% of all patients with RA are diagnosed with one or more additional chronic condition [16, 17]. In particular, it has been shown that the coexistence of multiple musculoskeletal conditions is high [2], and quality of life is seriously impaired in people with multiple musculoskeletal diseases [18].

Older patients with musculoskeletal conditions are thus an extremely heterogeneous group. The rheumatologist has to consider a broad array of treatment possibilities. However, both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions that are effective in regular treatment may be less appropriate in some older patients. Age can influence the effect of medication in a number of ways. First, older patients seem to be more vulnerable to side-effects of medication [5, 11]. Secondly, the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs, and their interactions, are affected by age-related changes in the major organs and metabolism [19]. Thirdly, older people experience greater comorbidity and are therefore more likely to need multiple drug prescriptions. This increases the risk of adverse effects as a result of drug interaction. Comorbidity also increases the risk of exposure to multiple prescribers, resulting in fragmentation of care [20, 21]. Finally, compliance to medication regimes is poor in older people [22]. Compliance is hard to improve [23], especially in older patients with cognitive impairments.

These cognitive impairments, and other limitations in physical, psychological and social functioning in some older patients, can limit non-pharmacological treatment possibilities as well. In rheumatology, there is a growing emphasis on active and intensive non-pharmaceutical treatment [24–26]. These interventions emphasize the patient's active involvement, requiring highly developed motor and cognitive skills. However, some older people are unable to undergo relative complex treatment due to impaired motor and cognitive functioning [27]. In addition, social support and income both decline with age in some patients. These coping resources are important to cope with the disease and the demands of treatment.

To respond adequately to the needs of an ageing population with musculoskeletal problems, the Department of Rheumatology of the Sint Maartenskliniek in Nijmegen, The Netherlands, introduced a specialized service: the gerontorheumatological outpatient service. The aim of the service is similar to that of regular rheumatological care: to improve and preserve quality of life by preventing unnecessary impairment and disability, preserve independence, improve mobility, decrease pain, improve care quality and reduce the quantity of care. The gerontorheumatological outpatient service differs from regular rheumatological care in that it uses a problem-oriented approach tailored to the individual's specific needs and possibilities. It not only focuses on separate disease-related variables, but also uses a more holistic approach, taking age-related psychosocial and cultural issues into account.

Patients older than 75 yr with musculoskeletal problems can be referred to the outpatient service. Patients are scheduled for a dual appointment at the rheumatologist and a specialized nurse practitioner. The rheumatologist assesses disease and impairment variables and the nurse practitioner concentrates on the patient's functioning in activities of daily life. Furthermore, the nurse evaluates the patient's psychological, social and cognitive functioning as well as coping resources. At the same time, counsel and advice are given on a number of disease-related topics. Finally, the nurse practitioner assesses the patient's wishes and needs. The patient's problems and needs are thus assessed taking the patient's abilities and environment into account.

Directly after the dual appointment, the rheumatologist and nurse decide on a further course of action, tailored to the individual's health problems and possibilities. Three actions are possible. (i) The patient is dismissed from further treatment by the rheumatologist. Information related to diagnosis and/or treatment is sent to the general practitioner. The nurse practitioner can advise, inform, counsel and educate the elderly patient about diseases and diagnosis, home adaptations, aiding devices for activities of daily living, home-care possibilities, transport facilities and welfare organizations, and complementary community-based care. (ii) Further treatment may be given in primary care or community-based complementary care. (iii) Multidisciplinary treatment may be given in the hospital. All patients are rescheduled for a follow-up appointment. Patients are informed by the rheumatologist about the findings of the examination and treatment options are discussed with the patient.

The gerontorheumatological outpatient service was evaluated in 100 patients 75 yr of age or older (84 women and 16 men) [28]. Comorbidity was high in this sample (Table 1). In 100 patients 174 rheumatological conditions were diagnosed. Most predominant was osteoarthritis, which was found in over half of the patients, often in combination with another diagnosis. Only 25 patients were free of non-rheumatological chronic conditions. In 33 patients, one non-rheumatological condition was found and in 22 patients, there were two. Twenty patients suffered from three or four non-rheumatological conditions.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 1. Frequencies of rheumatological diagnosis and comorbidity (n = 100) [28]

 
Independence in activities of daily life was assessed by the nurse practitioner using the Barthels index [29, 30]. This index measures the extent to which a patient is able to perform a number of tasks independently. There was a large deviation in observed independence at baseline, 33 patients being completely able to perform all tasks independently. All other patients needed help, or used assisting devices, in performing a number of these tasks.

Most patients (69) were referred back to the general practitioner with additional treatment advice after one to three visits to the outpatient clinic. The remaining 31 patients received further treatment by the rheumatologist; 19 of them received regular outpatient treatment by the rheumatologist alone. In 12 patients, the problems were deemed serious enough to warrant multidisciplinary treatment, either ambulatory, clinical or surgical.

Patients were asked to evaluate the service by mailed questionnaire 6 months after the first referral. Most patients (86%) indicated that they had used the information and advice given during the gerontorheumatological service. Most patients (89%) would recommend the service to other patients of their age with similar problems, while 92% of the patients gave an overall positive evaluation. At the same time, all referring general practitioners were contacted by mail. A total of 77 different general practitioners referred the 100 patients included in the study. A short questionnaire was sent with which they could evaluate the content of the service. Of these 77 practitioners, 53 returned the mailed questionnaire (response rate = 69%); 82% indicated that the service had a positive effect for this patient, 82% would recommend the gerontorheumatological service to colleagues with similar patients, and 89% indicated that a gerontorheumatological service aimed at patients with musculoskeletal conditions is a useful initiative. These qualitative data suggest that the gerontorheumatological outpatient services may have positive effects on the patient's quality of life.

As yet, there is no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of special services for older patients with musculoskeletal conditions, such as this gerontorheumatology outpatient service. Evidence for a potential positive effect can be found in geriatrics. In dealing with complex problems in the elderly, geriatric specialists have developed the Geriatric Assessment: a multidisciplinary evaluation in which the multiple problems of older persons are uncovered, described, and explained, if possible, and in which the resources and strengths of the person are catalogued, the need for services is assessed, and a coordinated care plan is developed to focus interventions on the person's problems [31].

Over recent decades, geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) has been studied in both outpatient clinics and inpatient units. In an outpatient setting, positive effects have been reported on a wide range of outcome variables, including mortality [32], satisfaction on the part of both the patient and the primary physician [33], functional decline [34], quality of health and social care [35], health perception, social interaction, general wellbeing, life satisfaction, depression [36] and health-care utilization [37]. GEM has also been used in clinical situations [38]. In patients admitted to a hospital for an acute illness, GEM in combination with postdischarge home intervention did improve functional status and reduced the length of hospital stay and subsequent readmissions, and it also reduced nursing home admissions, enabling patients to live longer at home [39].

In 1993, Boyer stated that geriatric rheumatology is a much-needed subspeciality [27]. One can argue about the extent to which such a subspeciality is necessary. However, as was true a decade ago, more efforts should be made to keep the needs of the elderly with musculoskeletal conditions a priority on the clinical and scientific agenda of rheumatologists. Ongoing efforts should be made to address a number of important questions (Table 2).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
TABLE 2. Main areas of interest for future development and research

 
Research should be aimed first and foremost at identifying and describing the target group in need of specific interventions. Current methods to describe the target group are inadequate. Age groups are often used to define gerontorheumatological patients. However, a lot of older patients with a rheumatological condition function relatively well and are in no need of an additional gerontorheumatological service. There is an urgent need to describe patients in need of additional care more thoroughly. To this end, a choice of accurate instruments has to be made to assess relevant functioning in older patients with musculoskeletal conditions [40, 41]. Furthermore, risk factors have to be identified and their relative importance determined.

Another broad area of development and research should focus on developing a clear conceptual framework to guide potential interventions. What kinds of interventions are feasible in which situations? Which interventions should receive priority? For instance, in the non-compliant elderly, improving compliance with medication will have positive effects on treatment outcome. Pharmacist interventions have been shown to be effective in improving patient compliance in drug prescription [42, 43]. Similar interventions should be studied in the elderly with musculoskeletal conditions. In a similar way, recognition and treatment of depression in the elderly may have larger beneficial effects on functioning than treatment of the comorbid physical condition [44]. Finally, ethical considerations should be carefully weighed. When should one abstain from further interventions in the patient's last years of life?

The efficacy of any intervention in the elderly depends on the continuation of care in the community. Complementary community-based care has to be achieved in the treatment of elderly people with musculoskeletal conditions. Comprehensive community-based care coordinated by a clinical nurse specialist is a promising alternative form of care in rheumatology [45]. As this care for the elderly is most often coordinated by geriatric specialists and nurses specializing in geriatrics, rheumatologists should form close alliances with geriatrists to ensure optimal treatment for the older patient with musculoskeletal conditions.

Finally, a challenging topic will be to evaluate interventions in elderly patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Cost analyses of interventions are needed to be able to determine and compare costs of different interventions. However, it is much harder to show the effect of these interventions on quality of life. As quality of life in the elderly may be determined by factors other than those operating in younger people (for instance, loneliness and anxiety), the effects of interventions on these variables have to be incorporated in future research.

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Raina P, Dukeshire S, Lindsay J. Chambers LW. Chronic conditions and disabilities among seniors: an analysis of population-based health and activity limitation surveys. Ann Epidemiol 1998;8:402–9.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  2. Picavet HSJ, Hazes JMW. Prevalence of self-reported musculoskeletal diseases is high. Ann Rheum Dis 2003;62:644–50.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Calkins E. The geriatric age group. In: Maddison PJ, Isenberg DI Woo P, Glass D, eds. Oxford textbook of rheumatology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993:19–29.
  4. Satish S, Postigo LG, Ray LA, Goodwin. Chronic rheumatologic symptoms in a tri-ethnic sample of men and women aged 75 and older. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56:M471–76.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Schaardenburg D, Van den Brande KJ, Ligthart GJ, Breedveld FC en Hazes JM. Muskuloskeletal disorders and disability in persons aged 85 and older: a community survey. Ann Rheum Dis 1994;53:807–11.[Abstract]
  6. Badley EM, Wang PP. Arthritis and the aging population: projections of arthritis prevalence in Canada 1991 to 2031. J Rheumatol 1998;25:138–44.[ISI][Medline]
  7. Helmick CG, Lawrence RC, Pollard RA, Lloyd E, Heyse SP. Arthritis and other rheumatic conditions: who is affected now, who will be later? Arthritis Care Res 1995;8:203–11.[Medline]
  8. McGann PE. Geriatric assessment for the rheumatologist. Geriatr Rheumatol 2000;26:415–32.
  9. Man-Son-Hing M, Power B, Byzewski A, Dalziel, WB. Referral to specialized geriatric services. Which elderly people living in the community are likely to benefit? Can Fam Physician 1997;43:925–30.[ISI][Medline]
  10. Gamez-Nava JI, Gonzalez-Lopez L, Davis P, Suarez-Almaroz ME. Referral and diagnosis of common rheumatic diseases by primary care physicians. Br J Rheumatol 1998;37:1215–9.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  11. Michet CJ, Evans JM, Fleming KC, O’Duffy JD, Jurrisson ML, Hunder GG. Common rheumatologic diseases in elderly patients. Mayo Clin Proc 1995;70:1205–14.[ISI][Medline]
  12. Franssen MJAM, Van de Putte LBA. Gerontoreumatologie. Gerontologie Dossier 1996;1:42–5.
  13. Ward MM. Health services in rheumatology. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2000;12:99–103.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  14. Yazici Y, Paget SA. Elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2000;26:517–26.[ISI][Medline]
  15. Bajocchi G, La Corte R, Locaputo A, Govoni M, Trotta F. Elderly onset rheumatoid arthritis: clinical aspects. Clin Exp Rheum 2000;18:S49–50.[Medline]
  16. Gabriel SE, Crowson CS, O’Fallon WM. Comorbidity in arthritis. J Rheumatol 1999;26:2475–79.[ISI][Medline]
  17. Rupp I, Boshuizen HC, Jacobi CE, Dinant HJ. Comorbidity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: effects on health related quality of life. J Rheumatol 2004;31:58–65.[ISI][Medline]
  18. Picavet HS, Hoeymans N. Health related quality of life in multiple musculoskeletal diseases: SF-36 and EQ-5D in the DMC3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:723–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Denham MJ, Barnett NL. Drug therapy and the older person. Role of the pharmacist. Drug Saf 1998;19:243–50.
  20. Percy LA, Fang MA. Geropharmacology for the rheumatologist. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2000;26:433–55.[ISI][Medline]
  21. Majumdar SR, Soumerai SB. Why most interventions to improve physician prescribing do not seem to work. CMAJ 2003;169:30–1.[Free Full Text]
  22. Salzman C. Medication compliance in the elderly. J Clin Psychiatry 1995;56:18–22.
  23. Higgins N, Regan C. A systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions to help older people adhere to medication regimes. Age Ageing 2004;33:224–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. De Jong Z, Munneke M, Zwinderman AH et al. Is a long-term high intensity exercise program effective and safe for patients with rheumatoid arthritis? Results of a randomised controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:2415–24.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  25. Hammond A, Freeman K. The long-term outcomes from a randomised controlled trial of an educational-behavioural joint protection programme for people with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rehab 2004;18:520–8.[ISI][Medline]
  26. van Lankveld W, van Helmond T, Naring G, Rooij DJ, van en Hooge F. Partner participation in cognitive-behavioral self-management group treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2004;31:1738–45.[ISI][Medline]
  27. Boyer JT. Geriatric rheumatology. Arthritis Rheum 1993;36:1033–5.[ISI][Medline]
  28. van Lankveld W, Franssen M, van Kessel M, van de Putte L. Gerontorheumatological outpatient service. Arthritis Rheum 2004;51:299–301.[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Fortinsky RH, Granger CV, Seltzer GB. The use of functional assessment in understanding home care need. Med Care 1981;19:489–97.[ISI][Medline]
  30. Zijp EM, Van den Bosch JSG. Geriatrische revalidatie in een verpleegtehuis en de Barthel-index als graadmeter. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1995;139:1037–41.[Medline]
  31. NIH consensus development conference statement: Geriatric assessment methods for clinical decisionmaking. J Am Geriatr Soc 1988;36:342–7.[ISI][Medline]
  32. Boult C, Boult L, Morishita L, Smith SL, Kane RL. Outpatient geriatric evaluation and management. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46:296–302.[ISI][Medline]
  33. Morishita L, Boult C, Boult L, Smith S, Pacala JT. Satisfaction with outpatient geriatric evaluation and management (GEM). Gerontologist 1998;3:303–8.
  34. Boult C, Boult LB, Morishita L, Dowd B, Kane RL, Urdangarin CF. A randomised clinical trial of outpatient geriatric evaluation and management. J Am Geriatr Soc 2001;49:351–9.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  35. Toseland RW, O’Donnell JC, Engelhardt JB, Hendler SA, Richie JT, Jue D. Outpatient geriatric evaluation and management. Results of a randomized trial. Med Care 1996;34:624–40.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  36. Burns R, Nichols LO, Martindale-Adams J, Graney MJ. Interdisciplinary geriatric primary care evaluation and management: two-years outcome. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:8–13.[ISI][Medline]
  37. Leveille SG, Wagner EH, Davis C et al. Preventing disability and managing chronic illness in frail older adults: a randomised trial of a community-based partnership with primary care. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46:1191–8.[ISI][Medline]
  38. Cohen HJ, Feussner JR, Weinberger M et al. A controlled trial of inpatient and outpatient geriatric evaluation and management. N Engl J Med 2002;346:905–12.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Nikolaus T, Specht-Lieble N, Bach M, Oster P, Schlierf G. A randomised trial of comprehensive geriatric assessment and home intervention in the care of hospitalised patients. Age Ageing 1999;28:543–50.[Abstract]
  40. Brint JM, Clark KA. Geriatric evaluation is a useful adjunct to traditional medical care in the frail older patient. Tenn Med 1998;91:146–8.[Medline]
  41. Palmer RM. Geriatric assessment. Med Clin North Am 1999;83:1503–23.[ISI][Medline]
  42. Krska J, Cromarty JA, Arris F et al. Pharmacist-led medication review in patients over 65: a random controlled trial in primary care. Age Ageing 2001;30:205–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Zermansky AG, Petty DR, Raynor DK, Freemantle N, Vail A, Lowe CJ. Randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist of elderly patients receiving repeat prescriptions in general practice. Br Med J 2001;8:1340–3.[CrossRef]
  44. Hitchcock NP, Williams JW, Unützer J et al. Depression and comorbid illness in elderly primary care patients: impact on multiple domains of health status and well-being. Ann Fam Med 2004;2:555–62.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Vliet Vlieland TP. Multidisciplinary team care and outcome in rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2004;16:153–6.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]




This Article
Full Text (PDF)
All Versions of this Article:
44/4/419    most recent
keh555v1
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Add to My Personal Archive
Download to citation manager
Disclaimer
Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by van Lankveld, W.
Articles by Stenger, A.
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by van Lankveld, W.
Articles by Stenger, A.
Related Collections
Other Rheumatology