Age bias may hinder care of elders
Patient Safety Monitor Alert, March 9, 2005
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Patient Safety Monitor Alert!
Patients over age 65 generally receive less aggressive treatment for cancer than younger patients, less preventive care for high blood pressure and cholesterol, and double the dose they need of some psychiatric medicines because of society's age bias, the Boston Globe reports.
Because senior citizens are often overlooked for tests of new treatments and medicines, doctors do not have the evidence they need to provide appropriate care.
The age bias often results from misguided attempts to protect seniors from being harmed by overly aggressive treatments, some doctors say. Last week, the Journal of the American Medical Association published research showing that aggressive chemotherapy reduced deaths from breast cancer and recurrences in women over age 65 as much as younger women. The University of Vermont researchers said that age by itself should not determine doctors' and patients' decisions about cancer treatment.
In addition, researchers at Columbia University have found that half of all senior citizens with advanced colon cancer do not receive chemotherapy after surgery to remove the tumor, although older patients who receive this treatment live longer.
Bias contributes to older patients receiving less than optimal therapy for cancer, said Dr. Edward Trimble, who leads the efforts at the National Cancer Institute to improve cancer care for the elderly. Other factors include concerns about the ability of frail seniors or those with multiple illnesses to tolerate aggressive treatments. However, patients and providers should make these decisions on a case-by-case basis, not on myths about what the average older person can handle.
Sometimes older patients dismiss health problems as symptoms of old age and fail to mention them to their doctors. This can also contribute to undertreatment, doctors said.
To read the complete Boston Globe article, click here.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Patient Safety Monitor Alert!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q&A: Coding 'aspiration without pneumonia'
- Q&A tackles coding questions about injections and infusions
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Hospitalist-surgeon comanagement has no effect on outcomes
- Case Management Monthly, June 2012
- Searched
