Observational studyAtencion primaria
[Differences between institutionalized patients and those included in a home care program in Seville].
Observational study in Atencion primaria. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07182747 (Feasibility of a Multidisciplinary Intervention Programme Carried Out by Nursing and Physical Activity and Sports Sciences Students to Improve Frailty and Other Related Variables in Older Adults Living in Nursing Homes.), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Feasibility of a Multidisciplinary Intervention Programme Carried Out by Nursing and Physical Activity and Sports Sciences Students to Improve Frailty and Other Related Variables in Older Adults Living in Nursing Homes.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Construction and enhancement of a prototype for a medical-hospital equipment for hypodermoclysis: a qualitative study.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2024Article
- Peri- and Post-Menopausal Women with Schizophrenia and Related Disorders Are a Population with Specific Needs: A Narrative Review of Current Theories.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Nursing Care Ethical Implications Regarding Chronic Patients at Hospital Discharge.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo describe the characteristics and clinical differences between institutionalised patients and those included in a home care program.
designA descriptive, observational, cross-sectional, and multicentre study. Site Seville, 2016. STUDY SUBJECTS: A total 1857 elderly patients of similar characteristics (1441 institutionalised and 416 at home) in Seville in 2016. MEASUREMENTS: The variables studied included gender, age, civil status, family support, pathologies, multiple pathology criteria, and medication prescriptions. Functional and cognitive status was evaluated using the Barthel index, and the Lawton-Brody and Pfeiffer scales.
resultsThe majority of patients (71.40%) were women. The fact of being institutionalised or being included in a home care program were statistically related to the following pathologies and categories: schizophrenia (p<.001), arterial hypertension (p=.012), diabetes mellitus (p=.001), atrial fibrillation (p<.001), and neoplasia (p=.012), A1 (p=.012), A2 (p<.001), B1 (p<.001), B2 (p=.002), C (p<.001), E1 (p<.001), E3 (p=.01), F2 (p<.01), G2 (p=.024), and H (p=.005). The mean Barthel index of the sample was 49.1±34.45 (95% confidence interval: 47.49-50.7). The mean Lawton-Brody scale in the case of patients included the home care program was 2.33±2.49 and in those institutionalised 1.59±2.12. The mean Pfeiffer scale was 4.93±3.53.
conclusionsCognitive impairment was related to institutionalisation, being a result of possible neurological (E3 category) and psychiatric diseases. On the other hand, patient comorbidity was not related to it, because it is very high in patients included in a home care program, in whom functional and cognitive independency status is better.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.