ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Assistive products for long-term care among older people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Japan: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundAssistive products support energy conservation in older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that exhibits some disease-specific symptoms, such as dyspnea. This study aimed to determine the utilization of assistive products under long-term care (LTC) insurance and evaluate its association with COPD.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using anonymized medical and LTC insurance claims data obtained from a Japanese city. The participants were ≥ 65 years old and first certified as requiring LTC between April 2015 and March 2020. We selected seven assistive products, that could support the daily activities of older adults with COPD with utilization rates of 1.0% or more: handrails/grab bars, ramps, canes, walkers, wheelchairs, electronic beds, and bathing aids. After stratifying care needs levels into care needs level 1 or lower and care needs level 2 or higher, we conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to evaluate the association between the presence or absence of COPD and the use of each assistive product during the six months following certification, adjusting for sociodemographic and physical characteristics.
resultsAmong 18,597 participants, 769 (4.1%) had COPD. The assistive products frequently used by participants with COPD included handrails/grab bars (10.9%) and bathing aids (5.2%) among those requiring low care levels, and electronic beds (36.8%), handrails/grab bars (25.4%), and wheelchairs (15.3%) among those requiring middle to high care levels. Among participants requiring low care levels (n = 13,773), those with COPD were less likely to use handrails/grab bars (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.95) and more likely to use bathing aids (AOR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.01-2.25) compared with those without COPD. Among participants requiring middle to high care levels (n = 4,824), none of the assistive products had a significant association with COPD.
conclusionsOlder adults with COPD requiring low care levels were more likely to use assistive products for bathing than those without COPD, but the use of handrails/grab bars was less in those with COPD than that of those without. These results could be helpful to healthcare providers and policymakers when considering assistive product use for LTC to manage respiratory symptoms.
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.