Table 3 Outcomes of the implementation of the ZWIP
End of implementation: 1 July, 2011 | General practice 1 | General practice 2 | General practice 3 | General practice 4 | General practice 5 | General practice 6 | General practice 7 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of older people screened, n | 705 | 365 | 284 | 426 | 200 | 621 | 169 | 2770 |
Number of older people screened who were frail, n (%) | 71 (10.1) | 80 (21.9) | 49 (17.3) | 116 (27.2) | 25 (12.5) | 213 (34.3) | 43 (25.4) | 597 (21.6) |
Number of frail older people participating in the ZWIP, n (%) | 61 (85.9) | 25 (31.3) | 11 (22.4) | 55 (47.4) | 8 (32.0) | 118 (55.4) | 12 (27.9) | 290 (48.6) |
Female, n (%) | 34 (55.7) | 15 (60.0) | 4 (36.8) | 40 (72.7) | 6 (75.0) | 73 (61.9) | 10 (83.3) | 182 (62.8) |
Age, mean (SD) | 81.8 (5.4) | 81.6 (4.8) | 79.2 (5.8) | 80.2 (6.2) | 82.5 (7.5) | 81.1 (5.6) | 82.8 (7.5) | 81.2 (5.7) |
Number of frail older people in the ZWIP who logged on to the ZWIP once, n (%) | 9 (14.8) | 2 (8.0) | 2 (18.2) | 8 (14.5) | 3 (37.5) | 18 (15.3) | 1 (8.3) | 43 (14.8) |
Number of frail older people in the ZWIP who logged on to the ZWIP more than once, n (%) | 25 (41.0) | 17 (68.0) | 5 (45.5) | 23 (41.8) | 5 (62.5) | 36 (30.5) | 6 (50.0) | 117 (40.3) |
Number of professionals participating in the ZWIP, n | 31 | 17 | 25 | 43 | 16 | 30 | 16 | 169f |
Female, n (%) | 21 (67.7) | 12 (70.6) | 18 (72.0) | 33 (76.7) | 12 (75.0) | 23 (76.7) | 13 (81.3) | 126 (74.6) |
Occupation, n (%) | ||||||||
General practitioner | 6 (19.4) | 4 (23.5) | 9 (36.0) | 8 (18.6) | 5 (31.3) | 9 (30.0) | 3 (18.8) | 42 (24.9) |
Practice nurse | 0 (0.0) | 1 (5.9) | 1 (4.0) | 1 (2.3) | 1 (6.3) | 6 (20.0) | 1 (6.3) | 13 (7.7) |
District nurse | 7 (22.6) | 1 (5.9) | 3 (12.0) | 8 (18.6) | 2 (12.5) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (25.0) | 24 (14.2) |
Pharmacist | 1 (3.2) | 1 (5.9) | 2 (8.0) | 6 (14.0) | 2 (12.5) | 1 (3.3) | 3 (18.8) | 15 (8.9) |
Physiotherapist | 7 (22.6) | 4 (23.5) | 3 (12.0) | 6 (14.0) | 3 (18.8) | 5 (16.7) | 2 (12.5) | 30 (17.8) |
(Gerontological) social worker | 1 (3.2) | 2 (11.8) | 3 (12.0) | 2 (4.7) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.3) | 1 (6.3) | 9 (5.3) |
Hospital-based specialist | 1 (3.2) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.0) | 2 (4.7) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (1.8) |
Other | 8 (25.8) | 4 (23.5) | 3 (12.0) | 10 (43.3) | 3 (18.8) | 8 (26.7) | 2 (12.5) | 33 (19.5) |
Number of professionals in the ZWIP of a frail older person, mean (range) | 2.5 (0–5)a | 4.1 (0–8)b | 1.9 (0–4) | 1.8 (0–5) | 4.1 (2–6) | 2.6 (1–6)d | 3.0 (1–5) | 2.6 (0–8)g |
Number of professionals in the ZWIP who logged on to the ZWIP once, n (%) | 2 (6.5) | 1 (5.9) | 2 (8.0) | 7 (16.7)c | 2 (12.5) | 3 (10.3)e | 8 (50.0) | 25 (15.0)h |
Number of professionals in the ZWIP who logged on to the ZWIP more than once, n (%) | 22 (71.0) | 14 (82.4) | 20 (80.0) | 26 (61.9)c | 11 (68.8) | 23 (79.3)e | 6 (37.5) | 116 (69.5)h |
Number of messages sent in the ZWIP by professionals, mean (range) | 3.6 (0–24) | 5.7 (0–46) | 0.3 (0–5) | 1.3 (0–17)c | 0.3 (0–3) | 0.9 (0–6)e | 0.7 (0–9) | 1.9 (0–46)h |
Number of messages sent in the ZWIP by frail older people and informal caregivers, mean (range) | 1.2 (0–21) | 3.2 (0–31) | 0.6 (0–2) | 0.9 (0–34) | 0.1 (0–1) | 0.1 (0–4) | 0.2 (0–1) | 0.8 (0–34) |
Number of frail older people in whose ZWIP ≥ 5 messages have been sent, n (%) | 7 (11.5) | 8 (32.0) | 2 (18.2) | 3 (5.5) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.8) | 0 (0.0) | 21 (7.2) |