Study

Methods

Selected Findings

Fulmer and Gurland (1996)

Design: Descriptive

Measure: CTS, FRS and NMAP Survey, Beck Depression Scale, BDBS

Sample: 125 elder-caregiver dyads; 51 dyads with cognitive impairment and 74 dyads with no cognitive impairment; mean age of the elder 78 years

Theory: Risk and vulnerability

Cognitive impairment risk factor for elder mistreatment.

CTS higher for CI patients.

FRS higher for CI patients.

CI patients more dependent.

CI patients had higher BDBS.

CI patients had higher Zarit Burden scores.

Fulmer et al. (1999)

Design: Descriptive

Method: Analysis of a probability sample of ADHC clients in New York State. Social workers served as informants.

Sample: 9 sites drawn through random sampling

Prevalence of elder mistreatment 12.3%.

Apprehensive behavior was highest reported behavior; with this item removed, prevalence 3.6%.

Social workers noted concern regarding elders who appeared frightened in the presence of their home caregiver.

Fulmer et al. (2000)

Design: Descriptive

Measure: EAI, MMSE

Sample: 180 emergency department patients over the age of 70 with MMSE of 18 or greater

36 patients eligible for study.

7 patients screened positive for neglect.

Nurses were able to screen for elder neglect with greater than 70% accuracy; true positive 71%, false positive 7%.

Huber et al. (2001)

Design: Descriptive

Method: Analysis of cross-sectional 6-state ombudsman database

Sample: 23,787 complaints

5 most frequent complaints were (1) loss of dignity and respect; (2) accidents; (3) physical abuse; (4) call lights unanswered; (5) poor personal hygiene.

Race and gender differences noted.

Hudson (1991)

Design: Descriptive

Measure: 3-round Delphi survey

Sample: 63 elder mistreatment experts

Agreement on a 5-level taxonomy.

11 theoretical definitions proposed by panel.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement