Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37792242›Full record

ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2024

The prevalence of non-pharmacological interventions in older homecare recipients: an overview from six European countries.

Eline C M Kooijmans, Emiel O Hoogendijk, Jitka Pokladníková, Louk Smalbil, Katarzyna Szczerbińska, Ilona Barańska, Adrianna Ziuziakowska, Daniela Fialová, Graziano Onder, Anja Declercq and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European geriatric medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Eline C M KooijmansDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.c.m.kooijmans@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4776-5364
Emiel O HoogendijkDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jitka PokladníkováDepartment of Social and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Louk SmalbilDepartment of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1111, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Katarzyna SzczerbińskaChair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Laboratory for Research on Aging Society, Medical Faculty, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Skawińska 8, Kraków, Poland.
Ilona BarańskaChair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Laboratory for Research on Aging Society, Medical Faculty, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Skawińska 8, Kraków, Poland.
Adrianna ZiuziakowskaChair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Laboratory for Research on Aging Society, Medical Faculty, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Skawińska 8, Kraków, Poland.
Daniela FialováDepartment of Social and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Graziano OnderFondazione Policlinico Gemelli IRCCS and Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Anja DeclercqLUCAS-Center for Care Research and Consultancy and Ceso-Center for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Harriet Finne-SoveriFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Mark HoogendoornDepartment of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1111, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hein P J van HoutDepartment of General Practice, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Karlijn J JolingAmsterdam Public Health, Ageing and Later Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
GGD Amsterdam · NLJagiellonian University · PLCharles University · CZVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIKU Leuven · BEPublic Health Service of Amsterdam · NLUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme 965341Seventh Framework Programme 305912
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeNon-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) play an important role in the management of older people receiving homecare. However, little is known about how often specific NPIs are being used and to what extent usage varies between countries. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of NPIs in older homecare recipients in six European countries.

methodsThis is a cross-sectional study of older homecare recipients (65+) using baseline data from the longitudinal cohort study 'Identifying best practices for care-dependent elderly by Benchmarking Costs and outcomes of community care' (IBenC). The analyzed NPIs are based on the interRAI Home Care instrument, a comprehensive geriatric assessment instrument. The prevalence of 24 NPIs was analyzed in Belgium, Germany, Finland, Iceland, Italy and the Netherlands. NPIs from seven groups were considered: psychosocial interventions, physical activity, regular care interventions, special therapies, preventive measures, special aids and environmental interventions.

resultsA total of 2884 homecare recipients were included. The mean age at baseline was 82.9 years and of all participants, 66.9% were female. The intervention with the highest prevalence in the study sample was 'emergency assistance available' (74%). Two other highly prevalent interventions were 'physical activity' (69%) and 'home nurse' (62%). Large differences between countries in the use of NPIs were observed and included, for example, 'going outside' (range 7-82%), 'home health aids' (range 12-93%), and 'physician visit' (range 24-94%).

conclusionsThe use of NPIs varied considerably between homecare users in different European countries. It is important to better understand the barriers and facilitators of use of these potentially beneficial interventions in order to design successful uptake strategies.

Indexed as

Longitudinal StudiesAgedCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeFemaleHumansMalePrevalenceCare for older personsHomecareNon-drug interventionsNon-pharmacological interventionsOlder people

Identifiers

PMID37792242
PMCPMC10876758
OpenAlexW4387326994

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.