Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 May;73(5):1576-1587.
doi: 10.1111/jgs.19339. Epub 2025 Jan 6.

A Novel Integrated Geriatric Services Hub for Frailty Identification and Comprehensive Management of Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Singapore: Impact on Health Service Utilization

Grace Sum  1 , Robin Wai Munn Choo  1 , Ze Ling Nai  1 , Siew Fong Goh  1 , Wee Shiong Lim  1   2   3 , Yew Yoong Ding  1   2   3 , Woan Shin Tan  1 ; Geriatric Services Hub Program Group
Collaborators, Affiliations

A Novel Integrated Geriatric Services Hub for Frailty Identification and Comprehensive Management of Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Singapore: Impact on Health Service Utilization

Grace Sum et al. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2025 May.

Abstract

Background: Healthcare systems need to address the high healthcare use of frail older adults. The Geriatric Services Hub (GSH) is a novel program in Singapore that delivers frailty screening, comprehensive geriatric assessment and coordinated care for community-dwelling older persons with bio-psycho-social needs. We aimed to evaluate the effects of the GSH on healthcare use.

Methods: We compared healthcare utilization of 634 GSH participants with 634 unique propensity score-matched non-GSH community-dwelling older adults at 12 months before and after GSH enrolment. Baseline matching covariates included demographics, socioeconomic status, disease burden, calendar quarter of enrolment, and past healthcare utilization. We did exact matching on frailty categories (Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) score 4, 5, and 6-7). Difference-in-differences technique was used to derive effect estimates.

Results: After propensity score matching, baseline covariates were adequately balanced. Healthcare utilization declined in both groups after GSH enrolment. Relative to the comparators and after accounting for pre-enrolment differences, participation in the GSH was associated with greater primary care (mean difference: 0.06, 95% CI-0.64 to 0.77) and specialist outpatient clinic visits (mean difference: 0.42, 95% CI -0.29 to 1.13), and fewer emergency department visits (mean difference: -0.18, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.34). However, these effects did not reach statistical significance. While number of hospitalizations did not differ between the groups, cumulative length of stay differed by 1.15 bed-days and was not statistically significant. No statistically significant differences were observed within CFS groups.

Conclusion: GSH was not associated with significant reductions in healthcare use in the first year of enrolment. Higher utilization of primary care and specialist outpatient clinic services could reflect the increased identification of care needs with the potential to reduce unnecessary healthcare use such as emergency department visits. Prospective studies with a longer follow-up would ascertain if the GSH translates to reduced healthcare utilization as hypothesized.

Keywords: aged; comprehensive geriatric assessment; frailty; health services research; integrated care; person‐centered care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Geriatric services hub (GSH) care model: a complex intervention.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Sample flowchart to derive the intervention and comparator groups for analysis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kojima G., Liljas A. E. M., and Iliffe S., “Frailty Syndrome: Implications and Challenges for Health Care Policy,” Risk Management and Healthcare Policy 12 (2019): 23–30. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lekan D. A., Collins S. K., and Hayajneh A. A., “Definitions of Frailty in Qualitative Research: A Qualitative Systematic Review,” Journal of Aging Research 2021 (2021): 6285058. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Biritwum R. B., Minicuci N., Yawson A. E., et al., “Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Frailty and Disability in Older Adults From China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russia and South Africa,” Maturitas 91 (2016): 8–18. - PubMed
    1. Kuzuya M., “Process of Physical Disability Among Older Adults—Contribution of Frailty in the Super‐Aged Society,” Nagoya Journal of Medical Science 74, no. 1–2 (2012): 31–37. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Collard R. M., Boter H., Schoevers R. A., and Oude Voshaar R. C., “Prevalence of Frailty in Community‐Dwelling Older Persons: A Systematic Review,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 60, no. 8 (2012): 1487–1492. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources