Beales and Tulloch’s arguments about anticipatory care of older patients1 represent the triumph of hope over experience. Anticipatory care for older people in the community has not yet been shown to be clinically or cost-effective in a thorough and less selective overview of the literature.2 Trials of anticipatory care for older people in US, UK, and Denmark up to 1990 showed a rise in patients’ morale, increased referrals to all agencies, reduced duration of in-patient stay (sometimes), increased in-patient rates (mostly respite care), reduction in mortality in some trials, but no improvement in functional ability and an increase in GP workload unless alternative services were provided.3
展开▼
