Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17253573›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Non-pharmacological interventions for wandering of people with dementia in the domestic setting.

D G Hermans, U Hla Htay, R McShane

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. A framework for managing wandering and preventing elopement.American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D G HermansUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, CDCIG Room 5802, Oxford, UK, OX3 9DU. dymphna.hermans@ndm.ox.ac.uk
U Hla Htay
R McShane
Cochrane · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA number of studies exist of interventions for wandering in the institutional setting, but much less work has been done on wandering in the domestic setting. The prevalence of wandering by people with dementia is difficult to assess; wandering is not a simple or static behaviour and the reasons why people wander remain unclear. In the absence of a theory of wandering and an agreed definition of wandering, it is difficult to discover effective strategies for managing wandering and difficult to design appropriate intervention strategies. Also, the same behaviour or type of wandering might occur for different reasons in different individuals; any theoretical formulation is going to have to allow for different triggers for the behaviour and so to get a 'one size fits all' kind of explanation is unlikely. Thus what we mostly encounter in this field is a 'trial and error' approach which does not always do justice to the complex interactions of personal and environmental factors that lead people with dementia to wander. While there seems to be a consensus in the literature that in the majority of cases non-pharmacological approaches may work as well as drug treatment and with fewer side effects, in practice clinicians often resort to drugs as the first line of treatment. This review reports the lack of evidence from RCTs and discusses the range of non-pharmacological interventions that have been carried out using other study designs.

objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non-pharmacological interventions in reducing wandering in the domestic setting by people with dementia. The secondary objective is to highlight the quality and quantity of research evidence available and to set an agenda for future research. SEARCH STRATEGY: The trials were identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 11 May 2006 using the terms exit* or wander* or elopement or ambulat* or walk*. This Register contains records from all major healthcare databases and many ongoing trial databases and is updated regularly. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials comparing intervention with no intervention or usual treatment ('standard care') or another intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: No suitable trials of non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention and management of wandering in the domestic setting were found. MAIN

resultsAs no randomised controlled trials were found, no results can be reported. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is an urgent need for randomised controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions for wandering in the domestic setting.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overConfusionDementiaExercise TherapyHumansWalking

Identifiers

PMID17253573
PMCPMC6669244
OpenAlexW1559294607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.