Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37218645›Full record

ReviewThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2023

Case management for integrated care of older people with frailty in community settings.

Euan Sadler, Zarnie Khadjesari, Alexandra Ziemann, Katie J Sheehan, Julie Whitney, Dan Wilson, Ioannis Bakolis, Nick Sevdalis, Jane Sandall, Tayana Soukup and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Euan SadlerSchool of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Zarnie KhadjesariSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Alexandra ZiemannDepartment of Social & Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Katie J SheehanSchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Julie WhitneySchool of Life Course & Population Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Dan WilsonDepartment of Clinical Gerontology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Ioannis BakolisHealth Service & Population Research Department, King's College London, London, UK.
Nick SevdalisCentre for Behavioural & Implementation Science Interventions (BISI), National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Jane SandallDepartment of Women and Children's Health, King's College London, London, UK.
Tayana SoukupDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Teresa CorbettFaculty of Sport, Health and Social Sciences, Solent University, Southampton, UK.
Daniela C Gonçalves-BradleyCINTESIS - Center for Health Technology and Services Research, Porto, Portugal.
Dawn-Marie WalkerSchool of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAgeing populations globally have contributed to increasing numbers of people living with frailty, which has significant implications for use of health and care services and costs. The British Geriatrics Society defines frailty as "a distinctive health state related to the ageing process in which multiple body systems gradually lose their inbuilt reserves". This leads to an increased susceptibility to adverse outcomes, such as reduced physical function, poorer quality of life, hospital admissions, and mortality. Case management interventions delivered in community settings are led by a health or social care professional, supported by a multidisciplinary team, and focus on the planning, provision, and co-ordination of care to meet the needs of the individual. Case management is one model of integrated care that has gained traction with policymakers to improve outcomes for populations at high risk of decline in health and well-being. These populations include older people living with frailty, who commonly have complex healthcare and social care needs but can experience poorly co-ordinated care due to fragmented care systems.

objectivesTo assess the effects of case management for integrated care of older people living with frailty compared with usual care. SEARCH

methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Health Systems Evidence, and PDQ Evidence and databases from inception to 23 September 2022. We also searched clinical registries and relevant grey literature databases, checked references of included trials and relevant systematic reviews, conducted citation searching of included trials, and contacted topic experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared case management with standard care in community-dwelling people aged 65 years and older living with frailty. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN

resultsWe included 20 trials (11,860 participants), all of which took place in high-income countries. Case management interventions in the included trials varied in terms of organisation, delivery, setting, and care providers involved. Most trials included a variety of healthcare and social care professionals, including nurse practitioners, allied healthcare professionals, social workers, geriatricians, physicians, psychologists, and clinical pharmacists. In nine trials, the case management intervention was delivered by nurses only. Follow-up ranged from three to 36 months. We judged most trials at unclear risk of selection and performance bias; this consideration, together with indirectness, justified downgrading the certainty of the evidence to low or moderate. Case management compared to standard care may result in little or no difference in the following outcomes. • Mortality at 12 months' follow-up (7.0% in the intervention group versus 7.5% in the control group; risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.15; I AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe found uncertain evidence regarding whether case management for integrated care of older people with frailty in community settings, compared to standard care, improved patient and service outcomes or reduced costs. There is a need for further research to develop a clear taxonomy of intervention components, to determine the active ingredients that work in case management interventions, and identify how such interventions benefit some people and not others.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedFrailtyAgedCase ManagementHealth PersonnelHospitalizationHumans

Identifiers

PMID37218645
PMCPMC10204122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.