Effectiveness of Community-Based Multidisciplinary Integrated Care for Older Adults with General Practitioner Involvement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Christina Hayes, Molly Manning, Christine Fitzgerald, Brian Condon, Anne Griffin, Margaret O’Connor, Liam Glynn, Katie Robinson, Rose Galvin
{"title":"Effectiveness of Community-Based Multidisciplinary Integrated Care for Older Adults with General Practitioner Involvement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Christina Hayes,&nbsp;Molly Manning,&nbsp;Christine Fitzgerald,&nbsp;Brian Condon,&nbsp;Anne Griffin,&nbsp;Margaret O’Connor,&nbsp;Liam Glynn,&nbsp;Katie Robinson,&nbsp;Rose Galvin","doi":"10.1155/2024/6437930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Background</i>. Changing demographics has led to healthcare systems reorientating healthcare delivery towards the community setting and implementing integrated models of care worldwide. This systematic review examines the effectiveness of community-based multidisciplinary integrated care strategies with general practitioner (GP) participation for community-dwelling older adults and describes the level of care integration in each study. <i>Methods</i>. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE were systematically searched in February 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster RCTs that focused on interventions for community-dwelling older adults delivered by health and social care professionals with GPs were included. Two reviewers independently conducted the risk of bias assessment, applied the GRADE tool to quantify the certainty of evidence, and used the rainbow model of integrated care taxonomy to describe the elements of integrated care. Outcomes included functional status, healthcare utilisation, participant satisfaction with care, health-related quality of life, mortality, nursing home admission, and adverse outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4. <i>Results</i>. Twelve trials recruiting 8069 participants across 8 countries were included. Community-based multidisciplinary team (MDT) integrated care demonstrated significant improvements in functional status (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05–0.37; low certainty evidence), hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR): 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63–0.95; very low certainty evidence), and participant satisfaction with care (SMD: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.15–0.76; low certainty evidence) from 12 to 36 months. No statistically significant effects favouring community-based MDT interventions for functional status at 6-month follow-up, emergency department presentation, mortality, health-related quality of life, or nursing home admission were established. <i>Conclusion</i>. Community-based MDT integrated care with GP participation improves functional status, reduces hospitalisations, and increases patient satisfaction among community-dwelling older adults in the long term. Future research should focus on models of integrated care that respond to the needs and preferences of older adults. This trial is registered with CRD42022309744.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48195,"journal":{"name":"Health & Social Care in the Community","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/6437930","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health & Social Care in the Community","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/6437930","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Changing demographics has led to healthcare systems reorientating healthcare delivery towards the community setting and implementing integrated models of care worldwide. This systematic review examines the effectiveness of community-based multidisciplinary integrated care strategies with general practitioner (GP) participation for community-dwelling older adults and describes the level of care integration in each study. Methods. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE were systematically searched in February 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster RCTs that focused on interventions for community-dwelling older adults delivered by health and social care professionals with GPs were included. Two reviewers independently conducted the risk of bias assessment, applied the GRADE tool to quantify the certainty of evidence, and used the rainbow model of integrated care taxonomy to describe the elements of integrated care. Outcomes included functional status, healthcare utilisation, participant satisfaction with care, health-related quality of life, mortality, nursing home admission, and adverse outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4. Results. Twelve trials recruiting 8069 participants across 8 countries were included. Community-based multidisciplinary team (MDT) integrated care demonstrated significant improvements in functional status (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05–0.37; low certainty evidence), hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR): 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63–0.95; very low certainty evidence), and participant satisfaction with care (SMD: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.15–0.76; low certainty evidence) from 12 to 36 months. No statistically significant effects favouring community-based MDT interventions for functional status at 6-month follow-up, emergency department presentation, mortality, health-related quality of life, or nursing home admission were established. Conclusion. Community-based MDT integrated care with GP participation improves functional status, reduces hospitalisations, and increases patient satisfaction among community-dwelling older adults in the long term. Future research should focus on models of integrated care that respond to the needs and preferences of older adults. This trial is registered with CRD42022309744.

Abstract Image

全科医生参与的老年人社区多学科综合护理的有效性:系统回顾与元分析
背景。人口结构的变化促使医疗系统将医疗服务的提供方向转向社区环境,并在全球范围内实施综合护理模式。本系统性综述探讨了有全科医生(GP)参与的社区多学科综合护理策略对居住在社区的老年人的有效性,并描述了每项研究的护理整合水平。研究方法在 2024 年 2 月对 PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane 图书馆对照试验中央登记册和 MEDLINE 进行了系统检索。纳入的随机对照试验(RCT)或分组 RCT 均侧重于由医疗和社会护理专业人员与全科医生共同为居住在社区的老年人提供的干预措施。两名审稿人独立进行了偏倚风险评估,应用 GRADE 工具量化了证据的确定性,并使用综合护理彩虹模式分类法描述了综合护理的要素。研究结果包括功能状态、医疗保健利用率、参与者对护理的满意度、与健康相关的生活质量、死亡率、入住疗养院和不良后果。使用Review Manager 5.4进行元分析。结果。共纳入了 12 项试验,招募了 8 个国家的 8069 名参与者。基于社区的多学科团队(MDT)综合护理显著改善了患者的功能状态(标准化平均差异(SMD):0.21;95% 置信区间(CI):0.05-0.37;低确证度证据)、住院率(风险比(RR):0.77;95% 置信区间(CI):0.05-0.37;低确证度证据)和不良后果:从 12 个月到 36 个月,参与者对护理的满意度(SMD:0.46;95% CI:0.15-0.76;低确证度证据)和住院率(风险比 (RR):0.77;95% CI:0.63-0.95;极低确证度证据)均无显著差异。在6个月随访时的功能状态、急诊就诊、死亡率、健康相关生活质量或入住养老院方面,社区MDT干预的效果无统计学意义。结论有全科医生参与的社区 MDT 综合护理能长期改善社区老年人的功能状况、减少住院次数并提高患者满意度。未来的研究应重点关注符合老年人需求和偏好的综合护理模式。该试验的注册号为 CRD42022309744。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
423
期刊介绍: Health and Social Care in the community is an essential journal for anyone involved in nursing, social work, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, general practice, health psychology, health economy, primary health care and the promotion of health. It is an international peer-reviewed journal supporting interdisciplinary collaboration on policy and practice within health and social care in the community. The journal publishes: - Original research papers in all areas of health and social care - Topical health and social care review articles - Policy and practice evaluations - Book reviews - Special issues
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信