Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23819964›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013

Care in specialist medical and mental health unit compared with standard care for older people with cognitive impairment admitted to general hospital: randomised controlled trial (NIHR TEAM trial).

Sarah E Goldberg, Lucy E Bradshaw, Fiona C Kearney, Catherine Russell, Kathy H Whittamore, Pippa E R Foster, Jil Mamza, John R F Gladman, Rob G Jones, Sarah A Lewis and 3 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01136148 (Evaluation of a Medical and Mental Health Unit Compared With Standard Care for Older People Whose Emergency Admission to an Acute General Hospital is Complicated by Concurrent 'Confusion'.), which is not on this map. Cited by 45 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT01136148 nacompletednot on this map

Evaluation of a Medical and Mental Health Unit Compared With Standard Care for Older People Whose Emergency Admission to an Acute General Hospital is Complicated by Concurrent 'Confusion'.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2010 to 2012Enrolled600ConditionsDementia, Confusion, Cognitive Impairment, DeliriumArmsA medical and mental health unit
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 158 citations in OpenAlex.

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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sarah E GoldbergDivision of Rehabilitation and Ageing, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK.
Lucy E Bradshaw
Fiona C Kearney
Catherine Russell
Kathy H Whittamore
Pippa E R Foster
Jil Mamza
John R F Gladman
Rob G Jones
Sarah A Lewis
Davina Porock
Rowan H Harwood
Medical Crises in Older People Study Group
University of Nottingham · GBQueen's Medical Centre · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · US

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0110-21229Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10147OAPP OASH HHS PB-PG-0110-21229OAPP OASH HHS RP-PG-0407-10147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop and evaluate a best practice model of general hospital acute medical care for older people with cognitive impairment.

designRandomised controlled trial, adapted to take account of constraints imposed by a busy acute medical admission system.

settingLarge acute general hospital in the United Kingdom.

participants600 patients aged over 65 admitted for acute medical care, identified as "confused" on admission.

interventionsParticipants were randomised to a specialist medical and mental health unit, designed to deliver best practice care for people with delirium or dementia, or to standard care (acute geriatric or general medical wards). Features of the specialist unit included joint staffing by medical and mental health professionals; enhanced staff training in delirium, dementia, and person centred dementia care; provision of organised purposeful activity; environmental modification to meet the needs of those with cognitive impairment; delirium prevention; and a proactive and inclusive approach to family carers.

main outcome measuresPRIMARY OUTCOME: number of days spent at home over the 90 days after randomisation. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: structured non-participant observations to ascertain patients' experiences; satisfaction of family carers with hospital care. When possible, outcome assessment was blind to allocation.

resultsThere was no significant difference in days spent at home between the specialist unit and standard care groups (median 51 v 45 days, 95% confidence interval for difference -12 to 24; P=0.3). Median index hospital stay was 11 versus 11 days, mortality 22% versus 25% (-9% to 4%), readmission 32% versus 35% (-10% to 5%), and new admission to care home 20% versus 28% (-16% to 0) for the specialist unit and standard care groups, respectively. Patients returning home spent a median of 70.5 versus 71.0 days at home (-6.0 to 6.5). Patients on the specialist unit spent significantly more time with positive mood or engagement (79% v 68%, 2% to 20%; P=0.03) and experienced more staff interactions that met emotional and psychological needs (median 4 v 1 per observation; P<0.001). More family carers were satisfied with care (overall 91% v 83%, 2% to 15%; P=0.004), and severe dissatisfaction was reduced (5% v 10%, -10% to 0%; P=0.05).

conclusionsSpecialist care for people with delirium and dementia improved the experience of patients and satisfaction of carers, but there were no convincing benefits in health status or service use. Patients' experience and carers' satisfaction might be more appropriate measures of success for frail older people approaching the end of life.

trial registrationClinical Trials NCT01136148.

Indexed as

Psychiatric Department, HospitalAgedAged, 80 and overCognition DisordersDeliriumDementiaFemaleHospitalizationHospitals, GeneralHumansLength of StayMaleNeuropsychological TestsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient ReadmissionQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID23819964
PMCPMC3698942
OpenAlexW2094550578

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.