Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Age Ageing. 2017 Nov 1;46(6):903-910. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afx051.
geriatric consultation teams have failed to impact clinical outcomes prompting geriatric co-management programmes to emerge as a promising strategy to manage frail patients on non-geriatric wards.
to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of in-hospital geriatric co-management.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 6 May 2016. Reference lists, trial registers and PubMed Central Citations were additionally searched.
randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies of in-hospital patients included in a geriatric co-management study. Two investigators performed the selection process independently.
standardised data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were performed independently by two investigators.
twelve studies and 3,590 patients were included from six randomised and six quasi-experimental studies. Geriatric co-management improved functional status and reduced the number of patients with complications in three of the four studies, but studies had a high risk of bias and outcomes were measured heterogeneously and could not be pooled. Co-management reduced the length of stay (pooled mean difference, -1.88 days [95% CI, -2.44 to -1.33]; 11 studies) and may reduce in-hospital mortality (pooled odds ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.50-1.03]; 7 studies). Meta-analysis identified no effect on the number of patients discharged home (5 studies), post-discharge mortality (3 studies) and readmission rate (4 studies).
there was low-quality evidence of a reduced length of stay and a reduced number of patients with complications, and very low-quality evidence of better functional status as a result of geriatric co-management.
老年病咨询小组未能影响临床结果,促使老年病共管计划作为一种有前途的策略出现,以管理非老年病房的虚弱患者。
对住院老年病共管的效果进行系统评价。
从开始到 2016 年 5 月 6 日,检索了 MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL 和 CENTRAL。此外,还检索了参考文献列表、试验登记处和 PubMed Central 引文。
包括在老年病共管研究中的住院患者的随机对照试验和准实验研究。两名调查员独立进行了选择过程。
两名调查员独立进行了标准化数据提取和偏倚风险评估。
从六项随机和六项准实验研究中纳入了 12 项研究和 3590 名患者。老年病共管在四项研究中的三项中改善了功能状态并减少了并发症患者的数量,但研究存在高偏倚风险,且结果的测量方法不一致,无法进行汇总。共管减少了住院时间(汇总平均差异,-1.88 天[95%置信区间,-2.44 至-1.33];11 项研究),并可能降低住院死亡率(汇总比值比,0.72[95%置信区间,0.50-1.03];7 项研究)。荟萃分析未发现对出院回家患者的数量(5 项研究)、出院后死亡率(3 项研究)和再入院率(4 项研究)有影响。
有低质量证据表明住院时间缩短,并发症患者减少,并且有非常低质量的证据表明老年病共管可改善功能状态。