ArticleBMC health services research2025
Which acute deterioration tools are used in long-term care facilities and how have they been evaluated? A scoping review.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prehospital emergency medical service missions to nursing homes - a descriptive retrospective register-based study in Southwest Finland.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Root causes and fields of action to address unplanned hospitalisation in long-term care: a multiple case study with root-cause analysis.BMC nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcute deterioration describes a rapid decline in health due to short-duration illnesses. This is an important topic for older adults living in long-term care facilities (LTCF). Signs of acute deterioration are often subtle, and there is no standardised system to manage it. The aim of this review is to scope the range of deterioration tools used in LTCFs, and to describe how they have been evaluated.
methodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Searches of five (MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, Embase, CINAHL, HMIC) electronic databases (2013-2023, updated 2025) and relevant websites were followed by title/abstract (by two authors independently) and full-text screening. Eligible studies involved tools used to manage acute deterioration for adults > 65 years in LTCFs. Experimental and observational study designs were eligible, including quality improvement projects. No country or language restrictions were imposed. A narrative synthesis was conducted.
resultsTwenty-six studies were included (23 peer-reviewed articles, two conference abstracts, one dissertation) after screening 5958 articles. A majority were from the UK (n = 10) and USA (n = 9), with small numbers from other high-income countries ((Australia (n = 2), Canada (n = 2), Sweden (n = 2), Switzerland (n = 1)). Studies employed a wide range of methodologies, with only one randomised study, and tools were frequently evaluated as part of multi-faceted interventions. The majority of studies described an intervention in which SBAR (situation-background-action-recommendation) (n = 15), National Early Warning Scores (n = 7) or STOP AND WATCH (n = 4) were a component. Studies used quantitative (n = 21) and qualitative (n = 9) methods to evaluate tools. Outcome measures were heterogeneous, with no data on resident experience. The majority of studies concluded potential benefit from using deterioration tools. There is some evidence that LTCF staff perceive tools, especially SBAR, as improving confidence in managing acute deterioration and aiding communication with external healthcare professionals.
conclusionDespite policy drivers to use deterioration tools in LTCFs, there is no robust evidence to support this. Direct benefits for resident care have not been demonstrated. Further research is required to compare tools to standard care, measure the impact on resident experience, and to determine if deterioration tools should become part of routine care in LTCFs.
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.