Cognitively impaired older adults: risk profiles for institutionalization

• Published in: International psychogeriatrics Vol. 15; no. 4; p. 351
• Main Authors: Strain, Laurel A, Blandford, Audrey A, Mitchell, Lori A, Hawranik, Pamela G
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England 01-12-2003
• Subjects: Activities of Daily Living - classification; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alzheimer Disease - diagnosis; Alzheimer Disease - epidemiology; Cluster Analysis; Cognition Disorders - diagnosis; Cognition Disorders - epidemiology; Cost of Illness; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Geriatric Assessment - statistics & numerical data; Homes for the Aged - statistics & numerical data; Humans; Institutionalization - statistics & numerical data; Likelihood Functions; Male; Manitoba - epidemiology; Mass Screening - statistics & numerical data; Mental Status Schedule - statistics & numerical data; Needs Assessment - statistics & numerical data; Nursing Homes - statistics & numerical data; Psychometrics; Risk; Social Behavior Disorders - diagnosis; Social Behavior Disorders - epidemiology; Manitoba
• DOI: 10.1017/S1041610203009608
• ISSN: 1041-6102

This study focused on the identification of risk profiles for institutionalization among older adults diagnosed with cognitive impairment-not dementia or dementia in 1991/92 and subsequent institutionalization in the following 5-year period.
Data were from a sample of 123 individuals aged 65+ and their unpaid caregivers in Manitoba, Canada. Cluster analysis was conducted using baseline characteristics of age, cognition, disruptive behaviors, ADLs/IADLs, use of formal in-home services, and level of caregiver burden.
Three distinct groups emerged (high risk [n = 12], medium risk [n = 40], and low risk [n = 71]). The high-risk group had the poorest cognitive scores, were the most likely to exhibit disruptive behaviors, were the most likely to need assistance with ADLs and IADLs, and had the highest level of burden among their caregivers. Follow-up of the groups validated the risk profiles; 75% of the high-risk group were institutionalized within the next 5 years, compared to 45% of the medium-risk group and 21% of the low-risk group.
The risk profiles highlight the diversity among individuals with cognitive impairment and the opportunity for differential targeting of services for the distinct needs of each group.