Effects of changing criteria on improving interRAI assessment for elder abuse: analysis of a national dataset from Aotearoa New Zealand

Globally, one in six older adults in the community will be a victim of abuse (elder abuse; EA). Despite these horrific statistics, EA remains largely undetected and under-reported. Available screening methods and tools fail to accurately identify the phenomenon's true prevalence. We aimed to test assessment capture rates by altering the criteria for suspicion of EA in the interRAI-HC (International Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care) in a large national dataset. We employed secondary analyses of existing data to test a methodology to improve the detection of older adults at risk of EA using the interRAI-HC, which currently underestimates the extent of abuse. The interRAI is a suite of clinical assessment instruments. In Aotearoa New Zealand, interRAI is mandatory in aged residential care and home and community services for older people living in the community. They are designed to show the assessor opportunities for improvement and any risks to the person's health. Capture rates of individuals at risk of EA when the interRAI Abuse-Clinical Assessment Protocol (A-CAP) is changed to include the unable to determine abuse (UDA) group shown in a pilot study to increase capture rates of individuals at risk of EA. Analysis of 9 years of interRAI-HC data (July 2013-June 2022) was undertaken, encompassing 186 713 individual assessments consisting of 108 992 women (58.4%) and 77 469 men (41.5%). The mean age was 82.1 years (range: 65-109); the majority 161 378 were European New Zealanders (86.4%) and the most common minority ethnicity was Māori (6.1%). Those at high risk of abuse (A-CAP) tended to be male (2402; 51.0%), were 79.2 years old on average (range 65-105), with 49.6% (2335) living alone, 39.4% (1858) suffering from depression and a majority were assessed as not having independent decision making (2942; 62.5%). In comparison, the UDA group showed similar characteristics to the A-CAP group on some measures. They were slightly younger than the general sample, with a mean age 80.1 years (range 65-107), they had higher rates of depression (2123; 33.5%) compared with the general sample (25 936; 14.8%) and a majority were assessed as not having independent decision-making (3855; 60.9%). The UDA group is distinct from the general sample and the UDA group broadly has similar but less extreme characteristics to the A-CAP group. Through altering the criteria for suspicion of EA, capture rates of at-risk individuals could be more than doubled from 2.5% to 5.9%. We propose that via adapting the interRAI-HC criteria to include the UDA category, the identification of older adults at risk of EA could be substantially improved, facilitating enhanced protection of this vulnerable population.

Competing interests: None declared.

PMC11227781