Connect with us

Health and Wellness

Could geriatric hospitals ease pressure on healthcare? Maybe – but improving care for older people is key

Published

on

Australia is grappling with an increase in hospital admissions amongst older people. 2015–16 and 2019–20Hospitalizations amongst people aged 75–84 increased by a mean of three% per yr, the biggest increase amongst all age groups.

The increasing demand is putting significant pressure on the healthcare system, contributing to poor patient flow, longer stays in emergency departments (EDs), and even ambulance overruns. This happens when paramedics are forced to attend on the hospital entrance and can’t transfer a patient to the ED in a timely manner.

In response, some health system leaders have recently called for the creation of independent geriatric hospitals to specifically meet the needs of older patients.

But is this an excellent idea? While there could also be some advantages, the decision for specialist geriatric hospitals signals that Australia is failing to supply adequate care for older people.

Geriatric care in Australia

Across Australia, geriatric care is often provided in sub-acute hospitals, specialist units, wards and clinics, following the acute a part of the hospital stay.

One path is geriatric assessment and management serviceswhich aim to enhance the functioning of patients with age-related diseases, similar to frailty and cognitive decline, following surgery or other medical incidents.

In most states, geriatric evaluation and management services may additionally be available delivered to your property.

Looking at the info from public hospitals across the countrywe are able to see that service levels vary across the state. We calculate that in 2020–21, geriatric assessment and management services with a minimum of one night’s stay accounted for 45% of sub-acute care admissions in Victoria and 20% in South Australia, but only about 8% within the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales.

These hospital-based services take a holistic approach to assessing multiple points of an older person’s health, similar to mobility, mental health, medication management, nutrition and social support, to tailor individual care plans that help older people live at home longerwith a greater quality of life.

On the opposite hand, lack of access to community-based geriatric care – similar to home care packages – is often seen as an element that increases the necessity for specialist geriatric care in hospitals and increases the length of hospital stay.

We know that current waiting time For a level 4 (highest) package, this era is between 9 and 12 months, although the federal government has committed to shortening this era with latest reforms to aged care.

Without adequate support at home, older people often find yourself in hospital, where they generally should spend weeks or months waiting to be transferred to a care facility.

Many older people stay in hospital for long periods of time while waiting for a spot in a senior care facility.
Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock

Pros and cons of geriatric hospitals

A specialist geriatric hospital may very well be designed across the needs of older patients. It could include specialist medical and support services, but also an adapted physical environment, similar to clear signage and quiet spaces.

It is necessary to think about who will staff these stand-alone geriatric hospitals. Geriatric patients will still need specialists aside from geriatricians, so cardiologists, for example, might want to concentrate on geriatric cardiology. Alternatively, separating care in this manner could mean that geriatric patients receive lower quality cardiology care (and other specialties).

Would additional capability in a stand-alone hospital help with healthcare system pressures? The easy answer is yes, but as with adding capability to the hospital system, if this unlocks unmet demand and draws much more patients into hospitals from the community and aged care, it is unlikely to assist with ED congestion.

It is also price considering whether an independent hospital could have its own geriatric emergency department. It is unlikely that an emergency department on this context would reach the patient volumes required by emergency departments to take care of quality and efficiency. However, without one, transfers from existing emergency departments would further strain limited ambulance resources.

So would a stand-alone geriatric hospital be cheaper than spending the identical budget to construct it otherwise? By focusing on specific populations where the impact can be biggest, we could make the marketing strategy work.

Dementia Care: A Potential Target for Specialist Hospitals

Psychogeriatric care – mental health care older adults – is a main example of where federal funding gaps are failing patients. This is particularly true for those with behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia.

Families are usually not well supported locally to deal with the large burden of care, and social services are usually not equipped to supply adequate support for these people. As a result, patients find yourself trapped within the social safety net of a public hospital bed.

These beds often provide non-specialist care for dementia patients. An unfamiliar and over-stimulating environment, coupled with staff who may misinterpret the behavior of those patients, only makes difficult behavior worseThis, in turn, makes it difficult for caregivers of older people to simply accept such an individual.

There are currently anecdotally 50 to 70 patients in South Africa with symptoms suggestive of dementia who’re stuck in hospital, with no pressing medical reason to be there, waiting for a spot where they could be safely discharged, similar to aged care. In our experience, the common length of stay for these patients is 50 to 60 days and contributes to bottlenecks within the ED. These numbers will only increase because the population ages.

A nurse looks at a smiling elderly woman sitting in a bed in a hospital or senior care facility.
One potential model for specialist geriatric hospitals may very well be hospitals for people with dementia.
We are MILA/Pexels

A stand-alone dementia hospital could link the states and the Commonwealth in caring for people with behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. It cannot replace residential care for older people, but it could help the transition by improving the hospital experience for people with special age-related needs.

However, it is essential to take care of existing multidisciplinary approaches, similar to geriatric assessment and management services, to avoid isolating or separating care from those that are already vulnerable.

Improving existing hospitals for the elderly

While there could also be some justification for the decision for stand-alone geriatric hospitals, ultimately it is a signal of Australia’s failure to supply adequate and integrated hospital and aged care.

Commonwealth Government recently announced significant changes to funding for older people’s care and latest support for home care. Existing hospital services will surely work higher if patients had more options to which they may very well be referred after their hospital stay.

Upcoming Commonwealth Aged Care Act is expected to reform many points of care for older Australians. However, without further detail and collaboration between the federal government and the states and territories, integrated service planning is impossible.

In the meantime, existing hospitals could begin to rework into places which can be higher adapted to the needs of older people.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Health and Wellness

Jury awarded $310 million to parents of teenager who died after falling on a ride at Florida amusement park – Essence

Published

on

By

Sun Sentinel/Getty Images

The family of Tire Sampson, the 14-yr-old who tragically died on an amusement park ride in Orlando, Florida, in 2022, has been awarded $310 million in a civil lawsuit.

Tire, who was visiting ICON Park along with his family on March 24, 2022, fell from the FreeFall drop tower. Although he was taken to a nearby hospital, he didn’t survive his injuries.

Now, greater than two years later, a jury has held the vehicle manufacturer, Austria-based Funtime Handels, responsible for the accident and awarded the Tire family $310 million. According to reports from local news stations WFTV AND KSDKthe jury reached its verdict after about an hour of deliberation.

Tyre’s parents will each receive $155 million, according to attorney spokesman Michael Haggard.

Attorneys Ben Crump and Natalie Jackson, who represented Tyre’s family, shared their thoughts on this landmark decision via X (formerly Twitter). “This ruling is a step forward in holding corporations accountable for the safety of their products,” they said in a statement.

Lawyers stressed that Tyre’s death was attributable to “gross negligence and a failure to put safety before profits.” They added that the ride’s manufacturer had “neglected its duty to protect passengers” and that the substantial award ensured it could “face the consequences of its decisions.”

Crump and Jackson said they hope the result will encourage change throughout the theme park industry. “We hope this will spur the entire industry to enforce more stringent safety measures,” they said. “Tire heritage will provide a safer future for drivers around the world.”

An investigation previously found that Tyre’s harness was locked through the descent, but he dislodged from his seat through the 430-foot fall when the magnets engaged. Tire’s death was ruled the result of “multiple injuries and trauma.”

ICON Park said at the time that it could “fully cooperate” with the authorities.

This article was originally published on : www.essence.com
Continue Reading

Health and Wellness

Tireless HIV/AIDS advocate A. Cornelius Baker dies

Published

on

By

HIV/AIDS Advocate, A. Cornelius Baker


A. Cornelius Baker, a tireless advocate of HIV and AIDS testing, research and vaccination, died Nov. 8 at his home in Washington, D.C., of hypertensive, atherosclerotic heart problems, in response to his partner, Gregory Nevins.

As previously reported, Baker was an early supporter for people living with HIV and AIDS within the Nineteen Eighties, when misinformation and fear-mongering in regards to the disease were rampant.

According to Douglas M. Brooks, director of the Office of National AIDS Policy under President Obama, it was Baker’s Christian faith that guided him toward compassion for others.

“He was very kind, very warm and inclusive – his circles, both professional and personal, were the most diverse I have ever seen, and he was guided by his Christian values,” Brooks told the outlet. “His ferocity was on display when people were marginalized, rejected or forgotten.”

In 1995, when he was executive director of the National AIDS Association, Baker pushed for June 27 to be designated National HIV Testing Day.

In 2012, he later wrote on the web site of the Global Health Advisor for which he was a technical advisor that: “These efforts were intended to help reduce the stigma associated with HIV testing and normalize it as part of regular screening.”

https://twitter.com/NBJContheMove/status/1856725113967632663?s=19

Baker also feared that men like himself, black gay men, and other men from marginalized communities were disproportionately affected by HIV and AIDS.

Baker pressured the Clinton administration to incorporate black and Latino people in clinical drug trials, and in 1994 he pointedly told the Clinton administration that he was bored with hearing guarantees but seeing no motion.

According to Lambda Legal CEO Kevin Jennings, yes that daring attitude that defines Baker’s legacy in the world of ​​HIV/AIDS promotion.

“Cornelius was a legendary leader in the fight for equality for LGBTQ+ people and all people living with HIV,” Jennings said in a press release. “In the more than twenty years that I knew him, I was continually impressed not only by how effective he was as a leader, but also by how he managed to strike the balance between being fierce and kind at the same time. His loss is devastating.”

Jennings continued: “Cornelius’ leadership can’t be overstated. For many years, he was one in all the nation’s leading HIV/AIDS warriors, working locally, nationally and internationally. No matter where he went, he proudly supported the HIV/AIDS community from the Nineteen Eighties until his death, serving in various positions including the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Association of Persons with Disabilities AIDS, and the Whitman-Walker Clinic . Jennings explained.

Jennings concluded: “His career also included several honors, including being the first recipient of the American Foundation for AIDS Research Foundation’s organization-building Courage Award. Our communities have lost a pillar in Cornelius, and as we mourn his death, we will be forever grateful for his decades of service to the community.”

Kaye Hayes, deputy assistant secretary for communicable diseases and director of the Office of Infectious Diseases and HIV/AIDS Policy, in her comment about his legacy, she called Baker “the North Star.”.

“It is difficult to overstate the impact his loss had on public health, the HIV/AIDS community or the place he held in my heart personally,” Hayes told Hiv.gov. “He was pushing us, charging us, pulling us, pushing us. With his unwavering commitment to the HIV movement, he represented the north star, constructing coalitions across sectors and dealing with leaders across the political spectrum to deal with health disparities and advocate for access to HIV treatment and look after all. He said, “The work isn’t done, the charge is still there, move on – you know what you have to do.” It’s in my ear and in my heart in the case of this job.

Hayes added: “His death is a significant loss to the public health community and to the many others who benefited from Cornelius’ vigilance. His legacy will continue to inspire and motivate us all.”

Baker is survived by his mother, Shirley Baker; his partner Nevins, who can be senior counsel at Lambda Legal; his sisters Chandrika Baker, Nadine Wallace and Yavodka Bishop; in addition to his two brothers, Kareem and Roosevelt Dowdell; along with the larger HIV/AIDS advocacy community.


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading

Health and Wellness

Bovaer is added to cow feed to reduce methane emissions. Does it pass into milk and meat? And is it harmful to humans?

Published

on

By

There are growing concerns in regards to the use of feed supplements, Bowar 10to reduce methane production in cows.

Bovaer 10 consists of silicon dioxide (mainly sand), propylene glycol (food stabilizer approved by Food Safety Australia New Zealand) and lively substance 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP).

There has been an enormous amount of misinformation in regards to the safety of 3-NOP, with some milk from herds fed this additive being labeled “Frankenmilk”. Others feared it could get to humans through beef.

The most significant thing is that 3-NOP is secure. Let’s clear up some major misconceptions.

Why do we want to limit methane production?

In our attempts to limit global warming, we’ve placed the best emphasis on CO₂ because the major man-made greenhouse gas. But methane is also a greenhouse gas, and although we produce less of it, it is: a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO₂.

Agriculture is the largest a man-made source of methane. As cattle herds expand to meet our growing demand for meat and milk, reducing methane production from cows is a vital way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

There are several ways to do that. Stopping bacteria within the stomachs of cows that produce methane one approach is to produce methane.

The methane produced by cows and sheep doesn’t come from the animals themselves, but from the microbes living of their digestive systems. 3-NO stop the enzymes that perform the last step of methane synthesis in these microorganisms.

3-NOP is not the one compound tested as a feed additive. Australian product based on seaweed, Rumin8for instance, it is also in development. Saponins, soap-like chemicals present in plants, and essential oils as well has been examined.

However, 3-NOP is currently one of the popular effective treatments.

Nitrooxypropanol structure: red balls are oxygen, gray carbon, blue nitrogen and white hydrogen.
PubChem

But is not it poison?

There are concerns on social media that Bovaer is “poisoning our food.”

But, as we are saying in toxicology, it’s the dose that makes the poison. For example, arsenic is deadly 2–20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight.

In contrast, 3-NOP was not lethal on the doses utilized in safety studies, up to 600 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight. At a dose of 100 mg per kg body weight in rats, it didn’t cause any adversarial effects.

What about reproductive issues?

The effect of 3-NOP on the reproductive organs has generated numerous commentary.

Studies in rats and cows showed that doses of 300–500 mg per kg body weight caused: contraction of the ovaries and testicles.

In comparison, to achieve the identical exposure in humans, a 70 kg human would want to eat 21–35 grams (about 2 tablespoons) of pure 3-NOP every day for a lot of weeks to see this effect.

No human will likely be exposed to this amount because 3-NOP doesn’t pass into milk – is fully metabolized within the cow’s intestines.

No cow will likely be exposed to these levels either.

The cow licks itself
Cows will not be exposed to levels tested on animals in laboratory studies.
Ground photo/Shutterstock

What about cancer?

3-NOP is not genotoxic or mutagenicwhich implies it cannot damage DNA. Thus, the results of 3-NOP are dose-limited, meaning that small doses will not be harmful, while very high doses are (unlike radiation where there is no secure dose).

Scientists found that at a dose of 300 mg per kilogram of body weight benign tumors of the small intestine of female ratsbut not male rats, after 2 years of every day consumption. At a dose of 100 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight, no tumors were observed.

Cows eat lower than 2 grams of Bovaer 10 per day (of which only 10% or 0.2 grams is 3-NOP). This is about 1,000 times lower than the appropriate every day intake 1 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight per day for a cow weighing 450 kg.

This level of consumption will likely be not the result in cancer or any of them other adversarial effects.

So how much are people exposed to?

Milk and meat consumers will likely be exposed to zero 3-NOP. 3-NOP doesn’t penetrate milk and meat: is completely metabolized within the cow’s intestines.

Farmers could also be exposed to small amounts of the feed additive, and industrial employees producing 3-NOP will potentially be exposed to larger amounts. Farmers and industrial employees already wear personal protective equipment to reduce exposure to other agricultural chemicals – and it is advisable to do that with Bovear 10 as well.

Milk
3-NOP doesn’t penetrate milk and meat.
Shutterstock

How widely has it been tested?

3-NOP has been in development for 15 years and has been subject to multiple reviews by European Food Safety Authority, UK Food Safety Authority AND others.

It has been extensively tested over months of exposure to cattle and has produced no unintended effects. Some studies actually say so improves the standard of milk and meat.

Bovaer was approved for use in dairy cattle by the European Union from 2022 and Japan in 2024. It is also utilized in many other countries, including: in beef products, amongst others Australia.

A really small amount of 3-NOP enters the environment (lower than 0.2% of the dose taken), no accumulates and is easily decomposed subsequently, it doesn’t pose a threat to the environment.

Since humans will not be exposed to 3-NOP through milk and meat, long-term exposure is not an issue.

What does Bill Gates have to do with this?

Bill Gates has invested in a distinct feed processing method for methane, Australian seaweed-based Rumin8. But he has nothing to do with Bovaer 10.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awarded research grants to the corporate producing 3-NOP for malaria control researchnot for 3-NOP.

The bottom line is that adding 3-NOP to animal feed doesn’t pose any risk to consumers, animals or the environment.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe Us To Receive Our Latest News Directly In Your Inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Trending