OBJECTIVES: To assess the evaluative research literature on the costs, quality and effectiveness of different locations of care for older patients. METHODS: A systematic review of evaluative research from 1988 using CRD4 guidelines. Twenty-five databases were searched, using processes developed specially for this review. Library OPACS, the Internet and research registers were also searched for relevant material. The final stage of the review was confined to randomised and pseudorandomised trials. Studies were selected for review by pairs of researchers working independently who then met to reach a decision. Analysis was predominantly descriptive; simple pooled odds ratios were used to explore some outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-four papers from 45 trials were included. Firm conclusions were difficult to draw, except in relation to some outcomes for stroke units, early discharge schemes and geriatric assessment units. Few trials in this area have adequately addressed issues of patients' quality of life and costs to health services, social care providers, patients and their families. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable recent development of different forms of care for older patients, evidence about effectiveness and costs is weak. However, evidence is also weak for longer-standing care models. A substantial service evaluation agenda emerges from this review. This study also raises questions about the usefulness of systematic review techniques in the area of service delivery and organisation.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the evaluative research literature on the costs, quality and effectiveness of different locations of care for older patients. METHODS: A systematic review of evaluative research from 1988 using CRD4 guidelines. Twenty-five databases were searched, using processes developed specially for this review. Library OPACS, the Internet and research registers were also searched for relevant material. The final stage of the review was confined to randomised and pseudorandomised trials. Studies were selected for review by pairs of researchers working independently who then met to reach a decision. Analysis was predominantly descriptive; simple pooled odds ratios were used to explore some outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-four papers from 45 trials were included. Firm conclusions were difficult to draw, except in relation to some outcomes for stroke units, early discharge schemes and geriatric assessment units. Few trials in this area have adequately addressed issues of patients' quality of life and costs to health services, social care providers, patients and their families. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable recent development of different forms of care for older patients, evidence about effectiveness and costs is weak. However, evidence is also weak for longer-standing care models. A substantial service evaluation agenda emerges from this review. This study also raises questions about the usefulness of systematic review techniques in the area of service delivery and organisation.
Authors: Allison M Gustavson; Rebecca S Boxer; Amy Nordon-Craft; Robin L Marcus; Andrea Daddato; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley Journal: Phys Ther J Policy Adm Leadersh Date: 2018-08
Authors: Leonard C Gray; Nancye M Peel; Maria Crotty; Susan E Kurrle; Lynne C Giles; Ian D Cameron Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: René J F Melis; Monique I J van Eijken; George F Borm; Michel Wensing; Eddy Adang; Eloy H van de Lisdonk; Theo van Achterberg; Marcel G M Olde Rikkert Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2005-10-05 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Juan J Baztán; Francisco M Suárez-García; Jesús López-Arrieta; Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas; Fernando Rodríguez-Artalejo Journal: BMJ Date: 2009-01-22
Authors: Mary T Fox; Malini Persaud; Ilo Maimets; Kelly O'Brien; Dina Brooks; Deborah Tregunno; Ellen Schraa Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-11-23 Impact factor: 5.562