Which stakeholders should be addressed to promote Geriatric Medicine among healthcare professionals, educationalists and policy-makers in European countries? - the PROGRAMMING COST 21,122 action experience

Sumru Savas; Nilufer Demiral Yilmaz; Marina Kotsani; Karolina Piotrowicz; Sofia Duque

doi:10.1007/s40520-024-02841-4

Which stakeholders should be addressed to promote Geriatric Medicine among healthcare professionals, educationalists and policy-makers in European countries? - the PROGRAMMING COST 21,122 action experience

Aging Clin Exp Res. 2024 Sep 23;36(1):194. doi: 10.1007/s40520-024-02841-4.

Authors

Sumru Savas¹, Nilufer Demiral Yilmaz², Marina Kotsani³, Karolina Piotrowicz^#⁴, Sofia Duque^#⁵

Affiliations

¹ Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.
² Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey. nilufer.demiral@ege.edu.tr.
³ Hellenic Society for the Study and Research of Ageing, Agia Paraskevi, Greece.
⁴ Department of Internal Medicine and Gerontology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
⁵ Preventive Medicine and Public Health Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Hospital Cuf Descobertas, Lisbon, Portugal.

^# Contributed equally.

Abstract

Background: Geriatric Medicine (GM), concerned with well-being and health of older adults, can play a crucial role in the alignment of healthcare systems to the needs of the aged populations. However, countries have varying GM development backgrounds. The goal of PROGRAMMING- COST 21,122 Action is to propose the content of education and training activities in GM for healthcare professionals across various clinical settings, adapted to local context, needs, and assets. Defining relevant stakeholders and addressing them on both an international as well as a country-specific level is crucial for this purpose. In this paper we are describing the methods used in the PROGRAMMING Action 21,122 to map the different categories of stakeholders to be engaged in the Action.

Methods: Through conceptualizing a model for stakeholders by literature research, and online discussion group meetings, a synthesis for the potential stakeholders was defined as a template, and pilot applications were requested from participant countries.

Results: There were 24 members from 14 countries (6 males/18 females) of multidisciplinary professions involved in this study. A model for the list of stakeholders to be addressed was developed and, after seven online discussion meetings, a consensus framework was provided. Invited countries completed the templates to pilot such operationalization.

Conclusion: Our framework of stakeholders will support the research coordination and capacity-building objectives of PROGRAMMING, including the participation into the assessment of educational needs of healthcare professionals. Identified stakeholders will also be mobilized for purposes of dissemination and maximization of the Action's impact. By defining and mapping multidisciplinary stakeholders involved in older people's care specific to countries, particularly where GM is still emerging, GM tailored educational activities will be facilitated and optimally targeted.

Keywords: Education; Geriatric medicine; Healthcare professionals; Stakeholders; Training.

MeSH terms

Administrative Personnel
Aged
Europe
Female
Geriatrics* / education
Health Personnel* / education
Humans
Male
Stakeholder Participation