Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
The College of Family Physicians of Canada
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums
  • My alerts
The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow cfp Template on Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
Research ArticleResearch

Underrepresentation of individuals 80 years of age and older in chronic disease clinical practice guidelines

Lizebeth Cox, Marita Kloseck, Richard Crilly, Carol McWilliam and Laura Diachun
Canadian Family Physician July 2011; 57 (7) e263-e269;
Lizebeth Cox
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: lcox2@uwo.ca
Marita Kloseck
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard Crilly
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carol McWilliam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laura Diachun
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • CFPlus
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objective To determine whether Canadian clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), and the evidence used to create CPGs, include individuals 80 years of age and older.

Design Descriptive analysis of 14 CPGs for 5 dominant chronic conditions (diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, osteoporosis, stroke) and descriptive analysis of all research-based references with human participants in the 14 guidelines.

Main outcome measures To identify recommendations for individuals 65 years of age and older or 80 years of age and older and for those with multiple chronic conditions.

Results Although 12 of 14 guidelines provided specific recommendations for individuals 65 years of age and older, only 5 provided recommendations for frail older individuals (≥ 80 years). A total of 2559 studies were used as evidence to support the recommendations in the 14 CPGs; 2272 studies provided the mean age of participants, of which only 31 (1.4%) reported a mean age of 80 years of age and older.

Conclusion There is very low representation of individuals in advanced old age in CPGs and in the studies upon which these guidelines are based, calling into question the applicability of current chronic disease CPGs to older individuals. The variety of medical and functional issues occurring in the elderly raises the concern of whether or not evidence-based disease-specific CPGs are appropriate for such a diverse population.

With an aging population and finite health care resources, quality improvement has become a priority for health care in the 21st century. Many evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed to promote high standards of care for chronic disease management.1–18 Unlike any other age stratum, individuals in advanced old age have been found to consume a large portion of medical and care services, in part because of their higher levels of comorbidity and institutionalization.19 As such, it is essential that the tools and evidence used to guide family physicians’ health care practices be applicable to a senior population and, in particular, to the unique needs of individuals in advanced old age.

The World Health Organization views the increasing prevalence and incidence of chronic diseases around the world as a global epidemic.20 Currently, chronic diseases account for 89% of all Canadian deaths, 80% of primary care physician visits, and two-thirds of all medical costs.21 Seniors, particularly those in advanced old age (80 years of age and older), offer unique challenges to chronic disease prevention and management practices. Current studies show that more than 80% of those in this population have at least 3 chronic conditions; more than 20% have 5 or more chronic conditions; and 50% are taking 5 or more medications.22,23 Despite these unique challenges, however, several recent studies highlight the exclusion of older patients from evidence-generating randomized controlled trials (RCTs).22,24,25 The focus on internal validity and the restrictive admission criteria lead to the exclusion of people with more complicated medical, cognitive, and functional problems.22,24 This restricts the generalizability of the studies by discounting individuals who differ substantially from the study population. If the health care needs of individuals in advanced old age are not being addressed in CPGs, and are not being considered in the evidence used to generate these CPGs, then this calls into question whether recommendations can be effectively extrapolated to guide clinicians caring for older individuals.

The purpose of this study was to analyze CPGs for 5 dominant chronic conditions (diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, osteoporosis, and stroke) to determine whether these guidelines, and the evidence used to support them, provide information for individuals in advanced old age with multiple chronic conditions.

METHODS

Guideline selection

Recommendations for 5 dominant chronic conditions (diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, osteoporosis, and stroke) were analyzed, specifically 14 commonly used evidence-based chronic disease CPGs.1–18 These chronic conditions were chosen because they affect a substantial percentage of older individuals, have an enormous effect on quality of life and Canadian health care costs, and have Canadian CPGs that are updated on a regular basis.

Descriptive analysis of all references published in the 14 guidelines was undertaken to determine the inclusion and representation of older individuals in the supporting evidence. The total number of references studied for each chronic disease was as follows: diabetes, N = 1883; hypertension, N = 299; heart failure, N = 750; osteoporosis, N = 600; stroke, N = 163. Of these, 2559 distinct research-based studies had human participants and were used as evidence for recommendations, 2272 of which included the mean ages of the study participants.

The 2008 diabetes,1 2002 osteoporosis,14 and 2006 stroke17 CPGs are comprehensive peer-reviewed guidelines that were produced to replace all previously published CPGs. These were reviewed along with any associated updates. Hypertension and heart failure CPGs are updated annually, with annual updates focusing on different treatment and management areas. Therefore, the hypertension and heart failure updates from 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006 were also reviewed.2–13 All references upon which recommendations from any of the 14 CPGs were based were included, with the understanding that some references were used as evidence for multiple recommendations both within the same CPGs and across different yearly updates.

Guideline assessment

Clinical practice guidelines were reviewed for age-specific recommendations, particularly for any identification or inclusion of frail older individuals, individuals older than 80 years of age, and individuals with multiple chronic conditions. Two sections of an instrument created by Boyd and colleagues24 to assess American guidelines, and used for the assessment of Australian guidelines by Vitry and Zhang,26 were adapted to assess the relevance of guidelines to the care of older people with multiple illnesses. Specifically, the “Issues Addressed” and “Recommendations” sections were expanded to distinguish between “younger” older individuals (65 to 79 years of age) and individuals in advanced old age (80 years of age or older).

Evidence assessment

All referenced articles used as justification for clinical recommendations in the 14 CPGs (ie, those that were research-based with human participants) were extracted and analyzed to examine the extent to which older individuals were included in the evidence-generating trials. The age data are presented in 2 ways. First, they are presented as the mean age plus 1 SD. We chose to use 1 SD because in a normal distribution, 84% of study participants would be below the mean age plus 1 SD. This percentage would be even greater if the age distribution were skewed in favour of younger participants as has been reported in recent reviews.22–24 It is debatable what proportion of representation a specific subgroup needs to have for the results to be applied to that subgroup, but it is conceivable that a poor outcome in the relatively small number of old people could be swamped by a positive result in the younger age group. This is particularly important if there are physiologic differences that might distinguish the smaller group from the general population, as is the case in frail older individuals.19,25 Second, age range data are presented; the studies were reviewed for the age range of participants to see if the upper end of the range crossed the 80-year age threshold (Table 11–18).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Composite mean age distribution in the research studies used as evidence for recommendations in the clinical practice guidelines

RESULTS

Chronic disease CPG assessment

Table 21–18 summarizes the findings from the review of the 14 CPGs included in this study. All CPGs specifically addressed individuals older than 65 years of age in their rationale and background sections. However, only the 2008 CPG for diabetes and the 2006 and 2007 CPGs for heart failure included specific sections on the prevention and management of these conditions in individuals older than 65 years of age.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Review of chronic disease guidelines for the inclusion of individuals 65 years of age and older, individuals 80 years of age and older, and individuals with chronic conditions

Twelve CPGs provided specific recommendations for individuals older than 65 years of age. The 4 hypertension CPG updates,6–13 however, all provided the same 3 recommendations, 2 of which cautioned the use of a recommended therapy (combination therapy and β-blockers) in elderly patients. Similarly, the only recommendation for older individuals in the 2002,14 2006,15 and 201016 osteoporosis CPGs identified individuals older than 65 years of age as being at risk of fragility fractures, suggesting that bone mineral density tests be conducted in this population. The 2008 stroke update18 provided 1 recommendation on sodium intake for individuals aged 50 to 70 years and 70 years or older. Neither the 2006 stroke CPG17 nor the 2008 heart failure CPG3 provided recommendations specific to the 65-years-and-older age group.

With regard to frail individuals or those older than 80 years of age, 5 CPGs provided specific recommendations. All heart failure guidelines, except the 2008 update, addressed the need for frail elderly heart failure patients to be treated as a unique population.2,4,5 The 2009 hypertension6,7 and 2008 stroke18 updates both recommended using caution in carrying out recommended therapies with frail elderly patients and acknowledged the lack of clinical trial data in this population.

Chronic disease CPGs and multiple chronic conditions

Most of the CPGs (13 of 141–14,16–18) discussed and provided specific recommendations for the treatment of their target conditions in the presence of at least 1 other condition, providing at least 1 specific recommendation on the issue of comorbidity. However, consideration of other comorbidities only occurred when a particular comorbidity formed part of a specific paradigm for an adverse outcome, such as when considering the management of hypertension in patients with diabetes. It was rare for guidelines to consider the effect of unrelated comorbidities, in particular multiple comorbidities or polypharmacy, on the disease management recommendations. The 2006 heart failure CPG5 was the only guideline to identify the high comorbid disease burden present in frail elderly patients.

Assessment of evidence in CPG development

Summaries of the mean ages and, where provided, SDs of the participants in the studies used as evidence in the 14 CPGs reviewed are presented in Figures 1 to 5* and Table 1.1–18

DISCUSSION

There is a growing body of literature concerned with the issue that CPGs do not address the needs of older individuals with complex comorbid illnesses.25–27 The findings from this review provide substantive support for these claims. Similar to the findings of Boyd and colleagues24 who reviewed 9 American CPGs, this review found that Canadian guidelines for diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, osteoporosis, and stroke offered very limited discussion and recommendations for individuals in advanced old age. Of the 2272 studies used as evidence for the recommendations in the CPGs that provided a mean age for their sample populations, only 31 (1.4%) had a mean age of 80 years or older. Even those CPGs with sections and recommendations specific to older individuals predominately looked at the “younger” older population (ie, 65 to 79 years of age). The 2008 diabetes CPG included a specific section on diabetes in the elderly. However, only 3.4% of the studies used to justify recommendations in this section included a sample with a mean age of 80 years or older. Most of the CPGs in which frail older individuals were identified merely provided cautionary statements about applying recommendations to these patients.

Of interest is the fact that if one were to focus on the age range, where provided, one would have the impression that many studies included older subjects. However, the percentage of studies in which the mean age or 1 SD above the mean age (meaning that at least 16% of the study group was aged 80 years or older) crossed the 80-years threshold was much lower, being on average about one-fifth of the total number of studies.

Randomized controlled trials are a necessity in medical research. Including older individuals, however, particularly those in advanced old age, can be very challenging owing to the high prevalence of confounding variables (greater disease severity, place of residence, comorbid conditions, functional limitation) present in this population. These confounding factors affect such critical matters as compliance, attendance for follow-up, and even survival, and can compromise the internal validity of the studies. Funders sponsoring RCTs tend to prioritize internal validity (the degree to which the measured outcomes can be correctly attributed to the intervention) over external validity, (the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized to other populations).28 Systematic reviews and guideline development, which turn the RCT results into usable recommendations, are necessarily at the mercy of the information available. Generalization of results to other populations needs to be done with caution, and it is only relatively recently that this issue has received much attention.25,29

Additionally, innovative ways to explore the value of different treatments in frail older people beyond the restrictive confines of the RCT are needed. Older individuals are likely to have multiple chronic conditions; therefore, they might be the recipients of multiple evidence-based recommendations and treatments without consideration of the effects of one set of recommendations on the other or of the effects of multiple recommendations on the patients themselves. In order to assist physicians in the management of frail older patients with multiple conditions, a hierarchical approach might be required to help physicians prioritize treatment with older individuals, initially targeting issues that are most likely to affect mortality, morbidity, and hospitalization.

Conclusion

Evidence-based chronic disease CPGs aim to provide standards to improve the quality of care for people with chronic diseases. However, there appears to be a substantial gap between the participant population in the many evidence-based trials that are used to create recommendations in CPGs and the diverse population to whom these CPGs might be generalized. Further investigation into the applicability of research findings and recommendations for populations in advanced old age needs to be conducted. A new approach that takes into account the possible interaction of multiple recommendations and multiple medications, as well as recognizing the mental and functional issues often present in the elderly population, should be considered.

Notes

EDITOR’S KEY POINTS

  • As the population ages, older individuals with chronic diseases are consuming a large portion of health care costs and services; however, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) developed to manage these conditions are not always applicable to this population, as the studies upon which recommendations are based rarely include older participants.

  • Individuals in advanced old age in particular are likely to have multiple chronic conditions; therefore, they might be the recipients of multiple evidence-based recommendations and treatments without consideration of comorbidity, conflicting management strategies, and polypharmacy.

  • Most CPG recommendations are based on randomized controlled trials. Including older individuals in such research studies can be challenging owing to the high prevalence of confounding variables (greater disease severity, place of residence, comorbid conditions, functional limitation) present in this population, which can affect critical matters such as follow-up, compliance, and survival, and compromise the internal validity of the study.

  • Further investigation into the applicability of research findings and recommendations to the aging population needs to be conducted, taking into account the possible interaction of multiple recommendations and medications and recognizing the mental and functional issues often present in older individuals.

POINTS DE REPÈRE DU RÉDACTEUR

  • Avec le vieillissement de la population, les personnes âgées souffrant de maladies chroniques accaparent une grande partie des coûts et services de santé; toutefois, les directives de pratique clinique (DPC) qui sont censées aider au traitement de ces conditions ne sont pas toujours applicables à cette population, puisqu’il est rare que les études sur lesquelles les recommandations sont basées portent aussi sur des sujets âgés.

  • Les sujets très âgés sont particulièrement susceptibles de présenter des affections multiples; ils pourraient donc être l’objet de plusieurs recommandations et traitements fondés sur des preuves qui ne tiennent pas compte de la comorbidité, des stratégies de traitement contradictoires et de la polypharmacie.

  • La plupart des recommandations des DPC sont basées sur des essais cliniques aléatoires. Il peut s’avérer difficile d’inclure des sujets âgés dans ce type d’étude en raison de la forte prévalence de facteurs parasites (maladies plus sévères, lieu de résidence, présence de comorbidité, limitations fonctionnelles) qui caractérisent cette population et qui peuvent affecter des éléments aussi importants que le suivi, l’observance thérapeutique et la survie, compromettant ainsi la validité interne de l’étude.

  • L’applicabilité des résultats de la recherche et des recommandations pour la population vieillissante devra faire l’objet d’études additionnelles, compte tenu de l’interaction possible des multiples recommandations et médications et au vu des problèmes d’ordre cognitif et fonctionnel souvent présents chez les sujets âgés.

Footnotes

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • Cet article a fait l’objet d’une révision par des pairs.

  • ↵* To access Figures 1 to 5, go to the full-text version of this article, then click on CFPlus Additional Material on the right-hand side of the page.

  • Contributors

    Ms Cox and Drs Kloseck, Crilly, McWilliam, and Diachun all contributed to concept and design of the study; data gathering, analysis, and interpretation; and preparing the manuscript for submission.

  • Competing interests

    None declared

  • Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada

References

  1. ↵
    1. Canadian Diabetes Association
    . Canadian Diabetes Association 2008 clinical practice guidelines. Toronto, ON: Canadian Diabetes Association; 2008. Available from: www.diabetes.ca/for-professionals/resources/2008-cpg. Accessed 2011 May 30.
  2. ↵
    1. Howlett JG,
    2. McKelvie RS,
    3. Arnold JM,
    4. Costigan J,
    5. Dorian P,
    6. Ducharme A,
    7. et al
    . Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference guidelines on heart failure, update 2009: diagnosis and management of right-sided heart failure, myocarditis, device therapy and recent important clinical trials. Can J Cardiol 2009;25(2):85-105.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Malcom J,
    2. Arnold O,
    3. Howlett JG,
    4. Ducharme A,
    5. Ezekowitz JA,
    6. Gardner MJ,
    7. et al
    . Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference guidelines on heart failure—2008 update: best practices for the transition of care of heart failure patients, and the recognition, investigation and treatment of cardiomyopathies. Can J Cardiol 2008;24(1):21-40.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Arnold JM,
    2. Howlett JG,
    3. Dorian P,
    4. Ducharme A,
    5. Giannetti N,
    6. Haddad H,
    7. et al
    . Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference recommendations on heart failure update 2007: prevention, management during intercurrent illness or acute decompensation, and use of biomarkers. Can J Cardiol 2007;23(1):21-45.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Arnold JM,
    2. Liu P,
    3. Demers C,
    4. Dorian P,
    5. Giannetti N,
    6. Haddad H,
    7. et al
    . Canadian Cardiovascular Society consensus conference recommendations on heart failure 2006: diagnosis and management. Can J Cardiol 2006;22(1):23-45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Padwal RS,
    2. Hemmelgarn BR,
    3. Khan NA,
    4. Grover S,
    5. McKay DW,
    6. Wilson T,
    7. et al
    . The 2009 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 1—blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk. Can J Cardiol 2009;25(5):279-86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Khan NA,
    2. Hemmelgarn B,
    3. Herman RJ,
    4. Bell CM,
    5. Mahon JL,
    6. Leiter LA,
    7. et al
    . The 2009 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 2—therapy. Can J Cardiol 2009;25(5):287-98.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Padwal RJ,
    2. Hemmelgarn BR,
    3. Khan NA,
    4. Grover S,
    5. McAlister FA,
    6. McKay DW,
    7. et al
    . The 2008 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 1—blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk. Can J Cardiol 2008;24(6):455-63.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Khan NA,
    2. Hemmelgarn B,
    3. Herman RJ,
    4. Rabkin SW,
    5. McAlister FA,
    6. Bell CM,
    7. et al
    . The 2008 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 2—therapy. Can J Cardiol 2008;24(6):465-75.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Padwal RS,
    2. Hemmelgarn BR,
    3. McAlister FA,
    4. McKay DW,
    5. Grover S,
    6. Wilson T,
    7. et al
    . The 2007 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 1—blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk. Can J Cardiol 2007;23(7):529-38.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Khan NA,
    2. Hemmelgarn B,
    3. Padwal R,
    4. Larochelle P,
    5. Mahon JL,
    6. Lewanczuk RZ,
    7. et al
    . The 2007 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part 2—therapy. Can J Cardiol 2007;23(7):539-50.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Hemmelgarn BR,
    2. McAlister FA,
    3. Grover S,
    4. Myers MG,
    5. McKay DW,
    6. Bolli P,
    7. et al
    . The 2006 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part I—blood pressure measurement, diagnosis and assessment of risk. Can J Cardiol 2006;22(7):573-81.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Khan NA,
    2. McAlister FA,
    3. Rabkin SW,
    4. Padwal R,
    5. Feldman RD,
    6. Campbell NR,
    7. et al
    . The 2006 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: part II—therapy. Can J Cardiol 2006;22(7):583-93.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Brown JP,
    2. Josse RG,
    3. Scientific Advisory Council of the Osteoporosis Society of Canada
    . 2002 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. CMAJ 2002;167(10 Suppl):S1-34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Brown JP,
    2. Fortier M,
    3. Frame H,
    4. Lalonde A,
    5. Papaioannou A,
    6. Senikas V,
    7. et al
    . Canadian Consensus Conference on osteoporosis, 2006 update. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2006;28(2 Suppl 1):S95-112.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Papaioannou A,
    2. Morin S,
    3. Cheung AM,
    4. Atkinson S,
    5. Brown JP,
    6. Feldman S,
    7. et al
    . 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary. CMAJ 2010;182(17):1864-73. Epub 2010 Oct 12.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. The Canadian Stroke Strategy
    . Canadian best practice recommendations for stroke care: 2006. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Stroke Network, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada; 2007. Available from: www.strokecenter.org/prof/CSSManualENG_WEB_Sept07.pdf. Accessed 2011 May 30.
  13. ↵
    1. Lindsay P,
    2. Bayley M,
    3. Hellings C,
    4. Hill M,
    5. Woodbury E,
    6. Phillips S
    . Canadian best practice recommendations for stroke care (updated 2008). CMAJ 2008;179(12):S1-25. Available from: www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/179/12/S1. Accessed 2011 May 30.doi:10.1503/cmaj.081148.R2
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Smith J
    . Well-being and health from age 70 to 100: findings from the Berlin Aging Study. Eur Rev 2001;9(4):461-77.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. World Health Organization
    . Preventing chronic diseases: a vital investment. WHO global report. Geneva, Switz: World Health Organization; 2005. Available from www.who.int/chp/chronic_disease_report/contents/en/index.html. Accessed 2011 May 30.
  16. ↵
    1. Morgan MW,
    2. Zamora NE,
    3. Hindmarsh MF
    . An inconvenient truth: a sustainable healthcare system requires chronic disease prevention and management transformation. Healthc Pap 2007;7(4):6-23.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Tinetti ME,
    2. Bogardus ST Jr.,
    3. Agostini JV
    . Potential pitfalls of disease-specific guidelines for patients with multiple conditions. N Engl J Med 2004;351(27):2870-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Shea AM,
    2. DePuy V,
    3. Allen JM,
    4. Weinfurt KP
    . Use and perceptions of clinical practice guidelines by internal medicine physicians. Am J Med Qual 2007;22(3):170-6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Boyd CM,
    2. Darer J,
    3. Boult C,
    4. Fried LP,
    5. Boult L,
    6. Wu AW
    . Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: implications for pay for performance. JAMA 2005;294(6):716-24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Baltes PB,
    2. Smith J
    . New frontiers in the future of aging: from successful aging of the young old to the dilemmas of the fourth age. Gerontology 2003;49(2):123-35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Vitry AI,
    2. Zhang Y
    . Quality of Australian clinical guidelines and relevance to the care of older people with multiple comorbid conditions. Med J Aust 2008;189(7):360-5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Mutasingwa DR,
    2. Ge H,
    3. Upshur REG
    . How applicable are clinical practice guidelines to elderly patients with comorbidities? Can Fam Physician 2011;57:e253-62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    1. Rothwell PM
    . Factors that can affect the external validity of randomised controlled trials. PLoS Clin Trials 2006;1(1):e9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Dzewaltowski DA,
    2. Estabrooks PA,
    3. Klesges LM,
    4. Bull S,
    5. Glasgow RE
    . Behavior change intervention research in community settings: how generalizable are the results? Health Promot Int 2004;19(2):235-45.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Family Physician: 57 (7)
Canadian Family Physician
Vol. 57, Issue 7
1 Jul 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The College of Family Physicians of Canada.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Underrepresentation of individuals 80 years of age and older in chronic disease clinical practice guidelines
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The College of Family Physicians of Canada
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The College of Family Physicians of Canada web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Underrepresentation of individuals 80 years of age and older in chronic disease clinical practice guidelines
Lizebeth Cox, Marita Kloseck, Richard Crilly, Carol McWilliam, Laura Diachun
Canadian Family Physician Jul 2011, 57 (7) e263-e269;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Underrepresentation of individuals 80 years of age and older in chronic disease clinical practice guidelines
Lizebeth Cox, Marita Kloseck, Richard Crilly, Carol McWilliam, Laura Diachun
Canadian Family Physician Jul 2011, 57 (7) e263-e269;
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Notes
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • CFPlus
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • The aging of family medicine
  • Le vieillissement de la médecine familiale
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Development and validation of the Fracture Risk Scale (FRS) that predicts fracture over a 1-year time period in institutionalised frail older people living in Canada: an electronic record-linked longitudinal cohort study
  • Recommendations for preventing fracture in long-term care
  • The aging of family medicine
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Journey of a pill
  • Prevalence and management of symptom diagnoses in children in general practice
  • How early-career family physicians integrate social accountability into practice
Show more Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Collection française
    • Résumés de recherche

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Collections - English
  • Collections - Française

For Authors

  • Authors and Reviewers
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Permissions
  • Terms of Use

General Information

  • About CFP
  • About the CFPC
  • Advertisers
  • Careers & Locums
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Subscribers

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • RSS Feeds

Copyright © 2025 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Powered by HighWire