A systematic review of interventions for persons living with dementia: The Geriatric ED Guidelines 2.0.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Sangil Lee, Michelle Suh, Luna Ragsdale, Justine Seidenfeld, James D van Oppen, Lauren Lapointe-Shaw, Carolina Diniz Hooper, James Jaramillo, Annie B Wescott, Alexander X Lo, Kaiho Hirata, Maura Kennedy, Lauren Cameron Comasco, Christopher R Carpenter, Teresita M Hogan, Shan W Liu
{"title":"A systematic review of interventions for persons living with dementia: The Geriatric ED Guidelines 2.0.","authors":"Sangil Lee, Michelle Suh, Luna Ragsdale, Justine Seidenfeld, James D van Oppen, Lauren Lapointe-Shaw, Carolina Diniz Hooper, James Jaramillo, Annie B Wescott, Alexander X Lo, Kaiho Hirata, Maura Kennedy, Lauren Cameron Comasco, Christopher R Carpenter, Teresita M Hogan, Shan W Liu","doi":"10.1111/acem.70074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The increasing prevalence of dementia poses significant challenges for emergency department (ED) care, as persons living with dementia (PLWD) more frequently experience adverse outcomes such as delirium, prolonged stays, and higher mortality rates. Despite advancements in care strategies, a critical gap remains in understanding how ED interventions impact outcomes in this vulnerable population. This systematic review aims to identify evidence-based ED care interventions tailored to PLWD to improve outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library (Wiley), Scopus (Elsevier), and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global through September 2024. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024586555). Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and quality improvement initiatives focused on ED interventions for PLWD. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through discussion. Outcomes included patient satisfaction, ED revisits, functional decline, and mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 3305 screened studies, six met the inclusion criteria. Interventions included nonpharmacologic therapies (e.g., music and light therapy), specialized geriatric ED units, and assessment tools, such as for pain. Tailored interventions including geriatric emergency units and community paramedic care transitions were effective in reducing 30-day ED revisits and hospitalizations. However, heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes precluded meta-analysis. Risk of bias ranged from low to moderate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review underscores the urgent need for standardized and evidence-based interventions in ED settings for PLWD. Approaches including multidisciplinary care models and nonpharmacologic therapies demonstrated potential for improving outcomes. Future research should prioritize consistent outcome measures, interdisciplinary collaboration, and person-centered care strategies to enhance the quality and equity of ED services for PLWD.</p>","PeriodicalId":7105,"journal":{"name":"Academic Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.70074","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The increasing prevalence of dementia poses significant challenges for emergency department (ED) care, as persons living with dementia (PLWD) more frequently experience adverse outcomes such as delirium, prolonged stays, and higher mortality rates. Despite advancements in care strategies, a critical gap remains in understanding how ED interventions impact outcomes in this vulnerable population. This systematic review aims to identify evidence-based ED care interventions tailored to PLWD to improve outcomes.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library (Wiley), Scopus (Elsevier), and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global through September 2024. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024586555). Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and quality improvement initiatives focused on ED interventions for PLWD. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through discussion. Outcomes included patient satisfaction, ED revisits, functional decline, and mortality.

Results: From 3305 screened studies, six met the inclusion criteria. Interventions included nonpharmacologic therapies (e.g., music and light therapy), specialized geriatric ED units, and assessment tools, such as for pain. Tailored interventions including geriatric emergency units and community paramedic care transitions were effective in reducing 30-day ED revisits and hospitalizations. However, heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes precluded meta-analysis. Risk of bias ranged from low to moderate.

Conclusion: This review underscores the urgent need for standardized and evidence-based interventions in ED settings for PLWD. Approaches including multidisciplinary care models and nonpharmacologic therapies demonstrated potential for improving outcomes. Future research should prioritize consistent outcome measures, interdisciplinary collaboration, and person-centered care strategies to enhance the quality and equity of ED services for PLWD.

对痴呆患者干预措施的系统回顾:老年ED指南2.0。
背景:痴呆症患病率的增加对急诊科(ED)护理提出了重大挑战,因为痴呆症患者(PLWD)更频繁地经历不良后果,如谵妄、延长住院时间和更高的死亡率。尽管在护理策略方面取得了进展,但在了解ED干预措施如何影响这一弱势群体的结果方面仍然存在重大差距。本系统综述旨在确定针对PLWD的循证ED护理干预措施,以改善预后。方法:对截至2024年9月的Ovid MEDLINE、Cochrane Library (Wiley)、Scopus (Elsevier)和ProQuest dissert&theses Global数据库进行系统综述。审查方案已在PROSPERO上注册(CRD42024586555)。符合条件的研究包括随机对照试验、观察性研究和关注ED干预PLWD的质量改进计划。数据提取和质量评估由两位审稿人独立完成,分歧通过讨论解决。结果包括患者满意度、急诊科复诊次数、功能下降和死亡率。结果:在筛选的3305项研究中,6项符合纳入标准。干预措施包括非药物治疗(如音乐和光疗),专门的老年ED单元和评估工具,如疼痛。量身定制的干预措施,包括老年急诊科和社区护理过渡,在减少30天急诊科就诊和住院方面是有效的。然而,研究设计和结果的异质性妨碍了meta分析。偏倚风险从低到中等。结论:这篇综述强调了对PLWD的ED设置进行标准化和循证干预的迫切需要。包括多学科护理模式和非药物治疗在内的方法显示出改善结果的潜力。未来的研究应优先考虑一致的结果测量、跨学科合作和以人为本的护理策略,以提高PLWD ED服务的质量和公平性。
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
Academic Emergency Medicine
Academic Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) is the official monthly publication of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM) and publishes information relevant to the practice, educational advancements, and investigation of emergency medicine. It is the second-largest peer-reviewed scientific journal in the specialty of emergency medicine. The goal of AEM is to advance the science, education, and clinical practice of emergency medicine, to serve as a voice for the academic emergency medicine community, and to promote SAEM''s goals and objectives. Members and non-members worldwide depend on this journal for translational medicine relevant to emergency medicine, as well as for clinical news, case studies and more. Each issue contains information relevant to the research, educational advancements, and practice in emergency medicine. Subject matter is diverse, including preclinical studies, clinical topics, health policy, and educational methods. The research of SAEM members contributes significantly to the scientific content and development of the journal.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信