Boland Laura, Légaré France, Perez Maria Margarita Becerra, Menear Matthew, Garvelink Mirjam Marjolein, McIsaac Daniel I, Painchaud Guérard Geneviève, Emond Julie, Brière Nathalie, Stacey Dawn
Population Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, 25 University Private, Ottawa, ON, K1N 7 K4, Canada.
CHU de Québec Research Centre-Université Laval site Hôpital St-Francois d'Assise, 10 Rue Espinay, Quebec, G1L 3 L5, Canada.
BMC Geriatr. 2017 Jan 14;17(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0395-y.
Many elders struggle with the decision to remain at home or to move to an alternative location of care. A person's location of care can influence health and wellbeing. Healthcare organizations and policy makers are increasingly challenged to better support elders' dwelling and health care needs. A summary of the evidence that examines home care compared to other care locations can inform decision making. We surveyed and summarized the evidence evaluating the impact of home care versus alternative locations of care on elder health outcomes.
We conducted an overview of systematic reviews. Data sources included MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Eligible reviews included adults 65+ years, elder home care, alternative care locations, and elder health outcomes. Two independent reviewers screened citations. We extracted data and appraised review quality using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist. Results were synthesized narratively.
The search yielded 2575 citations, of which 19 systematic reviews were eligible. Three hundred and forty studies with 271,660 participants were synthesized across the systematic reviews. The categories of comparisons included: home with support versus independent living at home (n = 11 reviews), home care versus institutional care (n = 3 reviews), and rehabilitation at home versus conventional rehabilitation services (n = 7 reviews). Two reviews had data relevant to two categories. Most reviews favoured home with support to independent living at home. Findings comparing home care to institutional care were mixed. Most reviews found no differences in health outcomes between rehabilitation at home versus conventional rehabilitation services. Systematic review quality was moderate, with a median AMSTAR score of 6 (range 4 - 10 out of 11).
The evidence on the impact of home care compared to alternative care locations on elder health outcomes is heterogeneous. Our findings support positive health impacts of home support interventions for community dwelling elders compared to independent living at home. There is insufficient evidence to determine the impact of alternative care locations on elders' health. Additional research targeting housing and care options for the elderly is needed.
许多老年人在决定是留在家中还是搬到其他护理场所时面临困难。一个人的护理场所会影响其健康和福祉。医疗保健组织和政策制定者在更好地支持老年人的居住和医疗保健需求方面面临着越来越大的挑战。对与其他护理场所相比的家庭护理证据进行总结可为决策提供参考。我们调查并总结了评估家庭护理与其他护理场所对老年人健康结局影响的证据。
我们对系统评价进行了概述。数据来源包括MEDLINE、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE和CINAHL。符合条件的评价包括65岁及以上的成年人、老年家庭护理、替代护理场所和老年人健康结局。两名独立评审员筛选了文献。我们使用系统评价方法学质量评估(AMSTAR)清单提取数据并评估评价质量。结果进行了叙述性综合。
检索共得到2575条文献,其中19项系统评价符合条件。在这些系统评价中综合了340项研究,涉及271,660名参与者。比较的类别包括:有支持的居家与独立居家(n = 11项评价)、家庭护理与机构护理(n = 3项评价)以及居家康复与传统康复服务(n = 7项评价)。两项评价有与两个类别相关的数据。大多数评价支持有支持的居家优于独立居家。比较家庭护理与机构护理的结果不一。大多数评价发现居家康复与传统康复服务在健康结局方面没有差异。系统评价质量中等,AMSTAR评分中位数为6(满分11分,范围为4 - 10分)。
与其他护理场所相比,家庭护理对老年人健康结局影响的证据存在异质性。我们的研究结果支持与独立居家相比,家庭支持干预对社区居住老年人有积极的健康影响。没有足够的证据来确定替代护理场所对老年人健康的影响。需要针对老年人的住房和护理选择进行更多研究。