Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20406866›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010

Inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Stefan Bachmann, Christoph Finger, Anke Huss, Matthias Egger, Andreas E Stuck, Kerri M Clough-Gorr

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02077049 (Are Serious Games Promoting Mobility an Attractive Alternative to Conventional Self-training for Elderly People? A Randomized Controlled Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 186 papers, 23 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
186citing papers in PubMed, 23 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02077049 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2014, after this paper: background citation

Are Serious Games Promoting Mobility an Attractive Alternative to Conventional Self-training for Elderly People? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorKlinik ValensRan2014 to 2015Enrolled54ConditionsMobility Limitations, Geriatric DisorderArmsserious games, Conventional self-training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

186 citing papers in PubMed, 23 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

126 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Stefan BachmannDepartment of Geriatrics, Inselspital, University of Bern Hospital, Freiburgstrasse 10, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Christoph Finger
Anke Huss
Matthias Egger
Andreas E Stuck
Kerri M Clough-Gorr

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the effects of inpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients compared with usual care on functional status, admissions to nursing homes, and mortality.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, and reference lists from published literature. Review methods Only randomised controlled trials were included. Trials had to report on inpatient rehabilitation and report at least one of functional improvement, admission to nursing homes, or mortality. Trials of consultation or outpatient services, trials including patients aged <55, trials of non-multidisciplinary rehabilitation, and trials without a control group receiving usual care were excluded. Data were double extracted. Odds ratios and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

results17 trials with 4780 people comparing the effects of general or orthopaedic geriatric rehabilitation programmes with usual care were included. Meta-analyses of effects indicated an overall benefit in outcomes at discharge (odds ratio 1.75 (95% confidence interval 1.31 to 2.35) for function, relative risk 0.64 (0.51 to 0.81) for nursing home admission, relative risk 0.72 (0.55 to 0.95) for mortality) and at end of follow-up (1.36 (1.07 to 1.71), 0.84 (0.72 to 0.99), 0.87 (0.77 to 0.97), respectively). Limited data were available on impact on health care or cost. Compared with those in control groups, weighted mean length of hospital stay after randomisation was longer in patients allocated to general geriatric rehabilitation (24.5 v 15.1 days) and shorter in patients allocated to orthopaedic rehabilitation (24.6 v 28.9 days).

conclusionInpatient rehabilitation specifically designed for geriatric patients has the potential to improve outcomes related to function, admission to nursing homes, and mortality. Insufficient data are available for defining characteristics and cost effectiveness of successful programmes.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAgedHip FracturesHomes for the AgedHospitalizationHumansNursing HomesPrognosisQuality of Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID20406866
PMCPMC2857746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.