• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

DOI:10.3310/hsdr07160
PMID:31017750
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Reablement is an intensive, time-limited intervention for people at risk of needing social care or an increased intensity of care. Differing from home care, it seeks to restore functioning and self-care skills. In England, it is a core element of intermediate care. The existing evidence base is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To describe reablement services in England and develop a service model typology; to conduct a mixed-methods comparative evaluation of service models investigating outcomes, factors that have an impact on outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness, and user and practitioner experiences; and to investigate specialist reablement services/practices for people with dementia.

METHODS

Work package (WP) 1, which took place in 2015, surveyed reablement services in England. Data were collected on organisational characteristics, service delivery and practice, and service costs and caseload. WP2 was an observational study of three reablement services, each representing a different service model. Data were collected on health (EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version) and social care related (Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit – self-completed) quality of life, practitioner (Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living) and self-reported (Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living scale) functioning, individual and service characteristics, and resource use. They were collected on entry into reablement ( = 186), at discharge ( = 128) and, for those reaching the point on the study timeline, at 6 months post discharge ( = 64). Interviews with staff and service users explored experiences of delivering or receiving reablement and its perceived impacts. In WP3, staff in eight reablement services were interviewed to investigate their experiences of reabling people with dementia.

RESULTS

A total of 201 services in 139 local authorities took part in the survey. Services varied in their organisational base, their relationship with other intermediate care services, their use of outsourced providers, their skill mix and the scope of their reablement input. These characteristics influenced aspects of service delivery and practice. The average cost per case was £1728. Lower than expected sample sizes meant that a comparison of service models in WP2 was not possible. The findings are preliminary. At discharge (T1), significant improvements in mean score on outcome measures, except self-reported functioning, were observed. Further improvements were observed at 6 months post discharge (T2), but these were significant for self-reported functioning only. There was some evidence that individual (e.g. engagement, mental health) and service (e.g. service structure) characteristics were associated with outcomes and resource use at T1. Staff’s views on factors affecting outcomes typically aligned with, or offered possible explanations for, these associations. However, it was not possible to establish the significance of these findings in terms of practice or commissioning decisions. Service users expressed satisfaction with reablement and identified two core impacts: regained independence and, during reablement, companionship. Staff participating in WP3 believed that people with dementia can benefit from reablement, but objectives may differ and expectations for regained independence may be inappropriate. Furthermore, staff believed that flexibility in practice (e.g. duration of home visits) should be incorporated into delivery models and adequate provision made for specialist training of staff.

CONCLUSIONS

The study contributes to our understanding of reablement, and what the impacts are on outcomes and costs. Staff believe that reablement can be appropriate for people with dementia. Findings will be of interest to commissioners and service managers. Future research should further investigate the factors that have an impact on outcomes, and reabling people with dementia.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

摘要

相似文献

1
2
Models of reablement evaluation (MoRE): a study protocol of a quasi-experimental mixed methods evaluation of reablement services in England.康复能力评估模型(MoRE):一项对英格兰康复服务进行准实验性混合方法评估的研究方案。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Aug 11;16(a):375. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1600-6.
3
Exploring voluntary sector specialist services for victim-survivors of sexual violence in England: the PROSPER co-production study.探索英格兰为性暴力受害者幸存者提供的志愿部门专业服务:PROSPER联合制作研究
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Apr;13(10):1-104. doi: 10.3310/WWKT3077.
4
A rapid mixed-methods evaluation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.英格兰 COVID-19 大流行期间远程家庭监护模式的快速混合方法评估。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023 Jul;11(13):1-151. doi: 10.3310/FVQW4410.
5
6
An intervention to promote self-management, independence and self-efficacy in people with early-stage dementia: the Journeying through Dementia RCT.促进早期痴呆症患者自我管理、独立和自我效能感的干预措施:Journeying through Dementia RCT 研究。
Health Technol Assess. 2022 May;26(24):1-152. doi: 10.3310/KHHA0861.
7
8
Outcomes of reablement and their measurement: Findings from an evaluation of English reablement services.再能力化服务的结果及其测量:来自英国再能力化服务评估的发现。
Health Soc Care Community. 2019 Nov;27(6):1438-1450. doi: 10.1111/hsc.12814. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
9
10
Process evaluation of a reablement training program for homecare staff to encourage independence in community-dwelling older adults.对一项再能力培训计划的过程评估,该计划针对的是家庭护理人员,旨在鼓励社区居住的老年人独立生活。
BMC Geriatr. 2021 Jan 6;21(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01936-7.