Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40211212›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2025

Interprofessional homebased reablement intervention for older adults in Sweden: a randomized controlled trial.

Lena-Karin Gustafsson, M Söderman, C Johansson, M L Elfström

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03565614 (Reablement Intervention for Older Adults Conducted by a Multi Professional Home Rehabilitation Team), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT03565614 nacompletednot on this map

Reablement Intervention for Older Adults Conducted by a Multi Professional Home Rehabilitation Team: A Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) With Qualitative Follow-ups of the Intervention

TypeinterventionalSponsorMälardalen UniversityRan2016 to 2019Enrolled240ConditionsRehabilitation by Recovery of FunctionArmsReablement, Traditional home care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

4 authors.

Lena-Karin GustafssonDivision of Caring Science, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Box 325, Eskilstuna, 63105, Sweden. lena-karin.gustafsson@mdu.se.
M SödermanDivision of Caring Science, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Box 325, Eskilstuna, 63105, Sweden.
C JohanssonDivision of Social Work, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden.
M L ElfströmDivision of Psychology, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReablement has a health promotive perspective. The goal is to enhance or maintain health and functional ability and, thereby, the ability of older adults to live in their own homes. The intervention described in this study was introduced so the older person would remain at home and be given the opportunity to regain or maintain functional ability physically, mentally, and socially to live independently and have optimal health and well-being. This paper aims to report the measured effects of reablement among the older adults in terms of bio-psycho-social health that emerged in the randomized controlled trial (RCT).

methodsA sample of older adults (65+) was studied, consisting of those who applied for homecare in the municipal home service (n = 237), those who received intensive home reablement (IHR) carried out by an interprofessional team, and a control group who received home-based care as usual. Data were collected at three different occasions with validated instruments: at inclusion, after completion of IHR, and 3 months after completed intervention.

resultsBoth groups improved significantly at the post-measurement, and this improvement was maintained at the 3-month follow-up regarding: global quality of life (HACT); general health (EQ-5D-5 L); the self-estimates for mobility, hygiene, daily activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression (EQ-5D-5 L); subjective well-being (GP-CORE); self-assessed capacity to perform physical activities as well as satisfaction with performance (COPM); measures of physical activity capacity regarding lower extremities (SPPB); upper extremities (hand dynamometer test). No between group differences were statistically significant. At the 3-month follow-up, the average number of homecare hours was slightly lower in the group that underwent IHR than in the group receiving usual homecare and rehabilitation interventions, but the difference was not statistically certain.

conclusionsIn this RCT with a relatively short follow-up period, IHR was equivalent to traditional homecare regarding older people's self-reported health, physical activity ability and number of homecare hours.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03565614?intr=Reablement&rank=4) Registration number: NCT03565614. Registered on 1 January 2016.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingHome Care ServicesQuality of LifeAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleSwedenHome careHome rehabilitationInterprofessional teamMunicipal home serviceOlder adultsRCTReablementRecovery

Identifiers

PMID40211212
PMCPMC11983755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.