Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30259497›Full record

SynthesisAging clinical and experimental research2019

A systematic review of specialist inpatient dementia care services versus standard inpatient dementia care in acute hospitals.

B M S McCausland, H P Patel, J Amin, D S Baldwin, K Loughran, V C Osman-Hicks

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

B M S McCauslandUniversity of Southampton Faculty of Medicine (Clinical and Experimental Sciences), University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. bmccausland@doctors.org.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9096-3289
H P PatelAcademic Geriatric Medicine, University of Southampton, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
J AminUniversity of Southampton Faculty of Medicine (Clinical and Experimental Sciences), University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
D S BaldwinUniversity of Southampton Faculty of Medicine (Clinical and Experimental Sciences), University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
K LoughranUniversity of Southampton Faculty of Medicine (Clinical and Experimental Sciences), University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
V C Osman-HicksUniversity of Southampton Faculty of Medicine (Clinical and Experimental Sciences), University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1015Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpecialist inpatient dementia units (SIDU) have been developed to address adverse outcomes often experienced by people living with dementia admitted to acute hospitals. However, the evidence base of their effectiveness remains limited.

aimTo review the current literature to establish the comparative effectiveness of acute hospital SIDU vs. standard ward care (SWC).

methodsWe did an online search of 12 biomedical databases from inception to 31st October 2017. Studies of inpatients with any form of dementia in acute hospitals, published in English language peer-reviewed journals, using experimental, observational or qualitative study designs, comparing SIDU with SWC and which measured any qualitative or quantitative outcome of the patient or carer experience were included in the search criteria. We used a standardised data extraction and appraisal form.

resultsThree of 46 full-text studies evaluated were suitable for analysis. Due to study heterogeneity, pooled odds ratios were only possible for mortality [OR 1.06 (CI 1.0-1.4)]. Otherwise, a narrative synthesis was performed. Although quantitative measures of length of stay, mortality and behavioural and psychiatric symptoms of dementia are not significantly lower, SIDU are associated with greater patient and carer satisfaction, reduced readmission rates, more accurate and comprehensive assessment processes, documentation of resuscitation decisions, and increased rates of discharge to the patient's own home.

conclusionsAlthough SIDU may be associated with improved care outcomes, the current evidence of their effectiveness is markedly limited. Further research and service evaluation of SIDU as a method for providing high-quality dementia care in acute NHS Trusts is needed. PROSPERO: CRD42017078364.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareCaregiversDementiaHospitalizationHospital UnitsHumansObservational Studies as TopicQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareAcute hospitalDementiaSpecialist dementia ward

Identifiers

PMID30259497
PMCPMC6491402
OpenAlexW2893101981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.