ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02664454CEPIAUpdated May 16, 2024

Compared Efficacy of Nurse-led and GP-led Geriatric Assessment in PrImary Care

An interventional study of health care organization in Multimorbidity and Geriatric Assessment, sponsored by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris. Completed at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 70 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-05-16.

Sponsored by Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
750
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
70 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Older patients account for around 10% of the population, of which 57% have a long-term illness, and 33% were admitted in the past year.

Geriatric assessment (GA) is a multidimensional assessment of general health status that can help identifying deficiencies and followed by a personalized care plan.

Assessment and management of elderly patients is a daily concern for the general practitioner (GP) but conflicting results have been reported so far relating to the clinical impact of GA when applied in the primary care setting.

This study protocol aims to assess the effect on morbi-mortality of a complex intervention in patients aged ≥70 years with chronic conditions in primary care. It aims to demonstrate that a GA adapted to primary care, followed by a personalized care plan and combined with successful interprofessional collaboration can improve clinically relevant outcomes in elderly patients with chronic conditions such as one-year overall mortality, unplanned hospital admission, emergency visits, or institutionalization.

The CEPIA study will also help addressing the issue of whether an improved benefit could be achieved from a systematic nurse-led or a case-by-case GP-led GA.

02

Conditions studied

  • Multimorbidity
  • Geriatric Assessment

Keywords

  • Elderly
  • Health care organization
  • Primary care
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris is the lead sponsor of 3,578 studies on the registry; 1,030 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
70 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged≥70 years with a long-term illness scheme or hospital admission the past 3 months
  • Visiting their preferred general practioner (GP) or another GP in the same practice
  • patient oral non opposition

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient who does not speak French
  • Severe disease with a life expectancy \<12 months
  • Institutionalized patients
  • Patient insured under the French national health insurance system
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
750 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Systematic nurse-led GA

    Interactive educational seminar for GPs and nurses, and focused on geriatric assessment in primary care combined with Systematic nurse-led GA and dedicated hotline for GPs seeking geriatric advice

    Other: health care organization

  • Experimental
    GP-led GA on a case-by-case basis, as decided by the GP

    Interactive educational seminar for GPs, and focused on Geriatric assessment in primary care combined with a GP-led GA on a case-by-case basis, as decided by the GP, and a dedicated hotline for GPs seeking geriatric advice

    Other: health care organization

  • No intervention
    No intervention

    No educational seminar Usual care

Interventions

  • Otherhealth care organization

    Nurse-led or GP-led Geriatric assessment combined with an educational seminar focused on GA and personalized care-plan as well as a dedicated hotline for general practitioners seeking a geriatric advice Interactive educational seminar Primary care

    Also known as: Nurse-led or GP-led Geriatric assessment combined with an educational seminar

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Primary composite endpoint combined with: - Percentage of all-cause mortality - Percentage of Unplanned hospital admission - Percentage of Emergency visits. - Percentage of Institutionalization

    Time frame: At 12 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of all-cause mortality

    Time frame: At 12 months

  2. Percentage of Unplanned hospital admission

    Time frame: At 12 months

  3. Percentage of Emergency visits

    Time frame: At 12 months

  4. Percentage of Institutionalization

    Time frame: At 12 months

  5. Quality of life (Duke profile score)

    Time frame: At Day 0 and 12 months

  6. Autonomy by KATZ ALD score

    Time frame: At Day 0 and 12 months

  7. Number of medication prescription (polypharmacy)

    Time frame: Up to 12 months

  8. Percentage of Geriatric assessment performed

    Time frame: Up to 12 months

  9. Percentage of personalized care plan performed

    Time frame: Up to 12 months

  10. Percentage of geriatric phone advices requested by GPs

    Time frame: Up to 12 months

  11. Percentage of health care actions planned

    Time frame: Up to 12 months

  12. Percentage of satisfied general practitioner with the intervention

    self-assessment

    Time frame: 27months after the beginning of the study

  13. Satisfaction of general practitioners and nurses after completion of intervention

    interview of general practionners and nurses by independant investigator

    Time frame: 12 months after the beginning of the study

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Faculté de Médecine, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC)
    Créteil, 94010, France
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Bouman A, van Rossum E, Nelemans P, Kempen GI, Knipschild P. Effects of intensive home visiting programs for older people with poor health status: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Apr 3;8:74. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-74. PubMed 18387184 ↗
  • Kuo HK, Scandrett KG, Dave J, Mitchell SL. The influence of outpatient comprehensive geriatric assessment on survival: a meta-analysis. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2004 Nov-Dec;39(3):245-54. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2004.03.009. PubMed 15381343 ↗
  • Stuck AE, Siu AL, Wieland GD, Adams J, Rubenstein LZ. Comprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet. 1993 Oct 23;342(8878):1032-6. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)92884-v. PubMed 8105269 ↗
  • Stuck AE, Egger M, Hammer A, Minder CE, Beck JC. Home visits to prevent nursing home admission and functional decline in elderly people: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. JAMA. 2002 Feb 27;287(8):1022-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.8.1022. PubMed 11866651 ↗
  • Frese T, Deutsch T, Keyser M, Sandholzer H. In-home preventive comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) reduces mortality--a randomized controlled trial. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2012 Nov-Dec;55(3):639-44. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2012.06.012. Epub 2012 Jul 11. PubMed 22790107 ↗
  • Ellis G, Whitehead MA, O'Neill D, Langhorne P, Robinson D. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jul 6;(7):CD006211. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006211.pub2. PubMed 21735403 ↗
  • Li CM, Chen CY, Li CY, Wang WD, Wu SC. The effectiveness of a comprehensive geriatric assessment intervention program for frailty in community-dwelling older people: a randomized, controlled trial. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2010 Feb;50 Suppl 1:S39-42. doi: 10.1016/S0167-4943(10)70011-X. PubMed 20171455 ↗
  • Orcel V, Ferrat E, Moscova L, Vigneron L, Michau B, Cittee J, Adeline F, Audureau E, Hagege M. Barriers to and facilitators of comprehensive geriatric assessment in primary care in France: a qualitative study exploring physicians' and nurses' experiences. BMC Prim Care. 2025 Dec 30;26(1):414. doi: 10.1186/s12875-025-03085-5. PubMed 41469541 ↗
  • Orcel V, Banh L, Bastuji-Garin S, Renard V, Boutin E, Gouja A, Caillet P, Paillaud E, Audureau E, Ferrat E. Effectiveness of comprehensive geriatric assessment adapted to primary care when provided by a nurse or a general practitioner: the CEpiA cluster-randomised trial. BMC Med. 2024 Sep 27;22(1):414. doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03613-7. PubMed 39334117 ↗
  • Ferrat E, Bastuji-Garin S, Paillaud E, Caillet P, Clerc P, Moscova L, Gouja A, Renard V, Attali C, Breton JL, Audureau E. Efficacy of nurse-led and general practitioner-led comprehensive geriatric assessment in primary care: protocol of a pragmatic three-arm cluster randomised controlled trial (CEpiA study). BMJ Open. 2018 Apr 12;8(4):e020597. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020597. PubMed 29654038 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 16, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02664454
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 27, 2016
Start date
May 24, 2016
Primary completion
Aug 24, 2018
Completion
Aug 24, 2018
Last update
May 16, 2024

Study contacts

Emilie Ferrat, MCU-MG
principal investigator · Université Paris Est (UPEC), IMRB, A-TVB DHU, CEpiA EA 7376 (Clinical Epidemiology and Ageing Unit)

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion