Trial reportClinical interventions in aging2021
Economic Evaluation of a Reablement Training Program for Homecare Staff Targeting Sedentary Behavior in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Compared to Usual Care: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Clinical interventions in aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03293303 (The Feasibility, Effects and Costs of the 'Stay Active at Home Programme'), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
The Feasibility, Effects and Costs of the 'Stay Active at Home Programme': Evaluation of a Preventive Integral Approach in Primary Care That Stimulates Physical Activity Among Community-dwelling Older Adults
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Reply to "Reconsidering Cost-Effectiveness Claims of Short-Term Prevention Services in Japan".Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review Investigating the International Economic Evidence to Inform the Development of a Career Pathway for Home Support Workers.Public health reviews · 2025Review
- The economics of home support services in Ireland: exploring complex issues of healthcare sustainability and aging populations.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Exploring a career pathway for home support workers in Ireland: a systematic scoping review of the international evidence.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Publication Trends in Reablement - A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTraining and supporting homecare staff in reablement aims to change staff behavior from "doing for" to "doing with" older adults and is assumed to benefit the health and quality of life of older adults and reduce healthcare utilization and costs. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the staff reablement training program "Stay Active at Home" (SAaH) from a societal perspective. PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsAn economic evaluation was embedded in a 12-month cluster randomized controlled trial. Ten Dutch homecare nursing teams participated (n = 313 staff members), of which five teams were trained in reablement and the other five provided usual care. Cost and effect data were collected from 264 older adults at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Costs included "intervention," "healthcare," and "patient and family" costs (collectively, societal costs) and were assessed using questionnaires and client records or estimated by bottom-up micro-costing. Effects included sedentary behavior and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Multiple imputed bootstrapped data were used to generate cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between the intervention and control group in terms of sedentary time (adjusted mean difference: 4.8 minutes [95% CI -26.4, 36.0]), QALYs ( 0.01 [95% CI -0.03, 0.04]), and societal costs ( €2216 [95% CI -459, 4895]), except lower costs for domestic help in the intervention group ( €-173 [95% CI -299, -50]). The probability that SAaH was cost-effective compared to usual care ranged from 7.1% to 19.9%, depending on the willingness-to-pay (WTP) (€0‒€50,000)/minute of sedentary time averted and was 5.9% at a WTP of €20,000/QALY gained.
conclusionSAaH did not improve outcomes or reduce costs and was not cost-effective from a societal perspective compared to usual care in Dutch older adults receiving homecare. Consequently, there is insufficient evidence to justify widespread implementation of the training program in its current form.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03293303.
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.