老年护理领域的康复、康复和恢复性护理方法:系统综述的范围综述。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Claire Gough, Raechel A Damarell, Janine Dizon, Paul D S Ross, Jennifer Tieman
{"title":"老年护理领域的康复、康复和恢复性护理方法:系统综述的范围综述。","authors":"Claire Gough, Raechel A Damarell, Janine Dizon, Paul D S Ross, Jennifer Tieman","doi":"10.1186/s12877-025-05680-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ageing populations are set to drive up demand for aged care services, placing strain on economies funding social care systems. Rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches are essential to this demographic shift as they aim to support independent function and quality of life of older people. Understanding the impact of these approaches requires nuanced insights into their definitions, funding, and delivery within the aged care context. This scoping review mapped and compared systematic review-level research on rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches within aged care with the aim of determining definitional clarity, key themes, and the professional groups delivering each approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nine databases were searched (2012 to September 2023) to identify English-language systematic reviews on aged care-based rehabilitation, reablement and/or restorative care. Two reviewers independently screened studies following predetermined eligibility criteria. Only reviews reporting quality appraisal findings were eligible. Data charting and synthesis followed the Arksey and O'Malley approach and are reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one reviews met inclusion criteria. Most (68%) reported on rehabilitation in aged care, and eight (20%) combined the approaches. Only 14 reviews (34%) defined the approach they described. Reviews centred on services for older people in the home or community (n = 15), across a mix of settings including community, hospital, and residential care (n = 10). Ten distinct themes highlight the importance of multidisciplinary teams, allied health, risk of falls, hip fracture, reduced functional independence, and specific types of interventions including physical activity, technology, cognitive rehabilitation, goal setting, and transition care. Most reviews described the role of occupational therapists (n = 22), physiotherapists (n = 20) and nurses (n = 14) with wider support from the multidisciplinary team. The quality of primary studies within the reviews varied widely.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This scoping review summarises the evidence landscape for rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches in the context of aged care. Despite their role in enhancing independence and quality of life for older people, policy, funding, and terminology variation means the evidence lacks clarity. This fragmented evidence makes it challenging to argue the effectiveness of one approach over another for older people in receipt of aged care services.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749624/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches in the aged care sector: a scoping review of systematic reviews.\",\"authors\":\"Claire Gough, Raechel A Damarell, Janine Dizon, Paul D S Ross, Jennifer Tieman\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12877-025-05680-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ageing populations are set to drive up demand for aged care services, placing strain on economies funding social care systems. Rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches are essential to this demographic shift as they aim to support independent function and quality of life of older people. Understanding the impact of these approaches requires nuanced insights into their definitions, funding, and delivery within the aged care context. This scoping review mapped and compared systematic review-level research on rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches within aged care with the aim of determining definitional clarity, key themes, and the professional groups delivering each approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nine databases were searched (2012 to September 2023) to identify English-language systematic reviews on aged care-based rehabilitation, reablement and/or restorative care. Two reviewers independently screened studies following predetermined eligibility criteria. Only reviews reporting quality appraisal findings were eligible. Data charting and synthesis followed the Arksey and O'Malley approach and are reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-one reviews met inclusion criteria. Most (68%) reported on rehabilitation in aged care, and eight (20%) combined the approaches. Only 14 reviews (34%) defined the approach they described. Reviews centred on services for older people in the home or community (n = 15), across a mix of settings including community, hospital, and residential care (n = 10). Ten distinct themes highlight the importance of multidisciplinary teams, allied health, risk of falls, hip fracture, reduced functional independence, and specific types of interventions including physical activity, technology, cognitive rehabilitation, goal setting, and transition care. Most reviews described the role of occupational therapists (n = 22), physiotherapists (n = 20) and nurses (n = 14) with wider support from the multidisciplinary team. The quality of primary studies within the reviews varied widely.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This scoping review summarises the evidence landscape for rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches in the context of aged care. Despite their role in enhancing independence and quality of life for older people, policy, funding, and terminology variation means the evidence lacks clarity. This fragmented evidence makes it challenging to argue the effectiveness of one approach over another for older people in receipt of aged care services.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749624/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Geriatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-05680-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-05680-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人口老龄化将推高对老年护理服务的需求,给为社会护理系统提供资金的经济体带来压力。康复、康复和恢复性护理方法对于这一人口转变至关重要,因为它们旨在支持老年人的独立功能和生活质量。要理解这些方法的影响,就需要对它们的定义、资金和在老年护理背景下的交付有细致入微的了解。本综述对老年护理中康复、康复和恢复性护理方法的系统综述级研究进行了绘制和比较,目的是确定定义的清晰度、关键主题和提供每种方法的专业团体。方法:检索9个数据库(2012年至2023年9月),以识别基于老年护理的康复、康复和/或恢复性护理的英语系统综述。两位审稿人按照预先确定的资格标准独立筛选研究。只有报告质量评估结果的评审是合格的。数据制图和综合遵循Arksey和O'Malley方法,并根据PRISMA-ScR指南进行报告。结果:41篇综述符合纳入标准。大多数(68%)报告了老年护理中的康复,8个(20%)结合了这两种方法。只有14篇评论(34%)定义了他们所描述的方法。审查集中于家庭或社区老年人服务(n = 15),包括社区、医院和寄宿护理(n = 10)。10个不同的主题强调了多学科团队、联合健康、跌倒风险、髋部骨折、功能独立性降低以及特定类型的干预措施(包括身体活动、技术、认知康复、目标设定和过渡护理)的重要性。大多数综述描述了职业治疗师(n = 22)、物理治疗师(n = 20)和护士(n = 14)的作用,并得到了多学科团队的广泛支持。综述中初级研究的质量差异很大。结论:本综述总结了老年护理背景下康复、恢复和恢复性护理方法的证据景观。尽管它们在提高老年人的独立性和生活质量方面发挥着作用,但政策、资金和术语差异意味着证据缺乏明确性。这种支离破碎的证据使得争论一种方法比另一种方法对接受老年护理服务的老年人的有效性具有挑战性。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches in the aged care sector: a scoping review of systematic reviews.

Background: Ageing populations are set to drive up demand for aged care services, placing strain on economies funding social care systems. Rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches are essential to this demographic shift as they aim to support independent function and quality of life of older people. Understanding the impact of these approaches requires nuanced insights into their definitions, funding, and delivery within the aged care context. This scoping review mapped and compared systematic review-level research on rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches within aged care with the aim of determining definitional clarity, key themes, and the professional groups delivering each approach.

Methods: Nine databases were searched (2012 to September 2023) to identify English-language systematic reviews on aged care-based rehabilitation, reablement and/or restorative care. Two reviewers independently screened studies following predetermined eligibility criteria. Only reviews reporting quality appraisal findings were eligible. Data charting and synthesis followed the Arksey and O'Malley approach and are reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines.

Results: Forty-one reviews met inclusion criteria. Most (68%) reported on rehabilitation in aged care, and eight (20%) combined the approaches. Only 14 reviews (34%) defined the approach they described. Reviews centred on services for older people in the home or community (n = 15), across a mix of settings including community, hospital, and residential care (n = 10). Ten distinct themes highlight the importance of multidisciplinary teams, allied health, risk of falls, hip fracture, reduced functional independence, and specific types of interventions including physical activity, technology, cognitive rehabilitation, goal setting, and transition care. Most reviews described the role of occupational therapists (n = 22), physiotherapists (n = 20) and nurses (n = 14) with wider support from the multidisciplinary team. The quality of primary studies within the reviews varied widely.

Conclusions: This scoping review summarises the evidence landscape for rehabilitation, reablement, and restorative care approaches in the context of aged care. Despite their role in enhancing independence and quality of life for older people, policy, funding, and terminology variation means the evidence lacks clarity. This fragmented evidence makes it challenging to argue the effectiveness of one approach over another for older people in receipt of aged care services.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Geriatrics
BMC Geriatrics GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
873
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.
×
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