The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of respite for caregivers of frail older people

Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (Impact Factor: 4.22). 03/2007; 55(2):290-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.01037.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The proportion of frail elderly people in the industrialized world is increasing. Respite care is a potentially important way of maintaining the quality of life for these people and their caregivers. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different models of community-based respite care for frail older people and their caregivers. To identify relevant studies, 37 databases were searched, and reference checking and citation searches were undertaken. Well-controlled effectiveness studies were eligible for inclusion, with uncontrolled studies admissible only in the absence of higher-quality evidence. Studies assessed the effect of community-based respite on caregivers of frail elderly people relative to usual care or to another support intervention. Eligible economic evaluations also addressed costs. Where appropriate, data were synthesized using standard meta-analytic techniques. Ten randomized, controlled trials, seven quasi-experimental studies and five uncontrolled studies were included in the review. For all types of respite, the effects upon caregivers were generally small, with better-controlled studies finding modest benefits only for certain subgroups, although many studies reported high levels of caregiver satisfaction. No reliable evidence was found that respite care delays entry to residential care or adversely affects frail older people. The economic evaluations all assessed day care, which tended to be associated with similar or higher costs than usual care. Given the increasing numbers of frail elderly people and the lack of up-to-date, good-quality evidence for all types of respite care, better-quality evidence is urgently needed to inform current policy and practice.

Download full-text


Available from: Anne Rosemary Mason, Jun 29, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to assess the association between Adult Day Health Center (ADHC) participation and health-related quality of life. Case-controlled prospective study utilizing the Medical Outcomes Survey Form 36 (SF-36) to compare newly enrolled participants from 16 ADHC programs with comparable community-dwelling older adults who did not attend an ADHC. Assessments were conducted at study enrollment, 6 and 12 months. ADHC participants (n = 57) and comparison group subjects (n = 67) were similar at baseline in age, ethnic diversity, medical conditions, depression, cognition, immigration history, education, income, and marital status. Significantly more comparison group subjects lived alone (p = .002). One year after enrollment, the SF-36 domains role physical and role emotional improved significantly. Adjusted role physical scores for ADHC participants improved (23 vs. 36) but declined for the comparison group (38 vs. 26, time by group interaction p = .01), and role emotional scores improved for ADHC participants (62 vs.70) but declined for the comparison group (65 vs. 48, time by group interaction p = .02). Secondary analyses revealed that changes in daily physical functioning, depressed affect, or cognitive functioning did not explain the improvements found in role physical and role emotional scores for ADHC participants. No significant differences in trends for the 2 groups occurred for the SF-36 domains physical functioning, social functioning, and mental health. ADHC participation may enhance older adults' quality of life. Quality of life may be a key measure to inform care planning, program improvement, and policy development of ADHC.
    The Gerontologist 08/2010; 50(4):531-40. DOI:10.1093/geront/gnp172 · 2.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To write a narrative review of the role of primary care physicians in the long-term care of people with dementia living at home, with a focus on psychosocial interventions, the provision of information and carer support, behavioural and psychological symptoms and case management. The systematic review carried out for the NICE/SCIE Guidelines was updated from January 2006, Cochrane Reviews were identified and other publications found by consultations with experts. In primary care, the long-term care of people with dementia living at home can be structured around several key themes: reframing dementia with a focus on a social model of disability; active use of information sources; supporting carers (caregivers); the management of behavioural and psychological symptoms and a structured case management approach. Caring for people with dementia in primary care demands the same systematic approach as the management of other long-term conditions. The systematic follow-up of both people with dementia and their carers should be integrated into primary care. Reframing dementia, with an emphasis on abilities retained may allow people with dementia and their families to develop more effective coping strategies; an increase in skill mix within primary care is required to deliver this and may also improve the management of behavioural problems. The potential benefits of person-centred interventions, like advance care planning, and alternative models of service delivery, such as a structured, collaborative care approach which promotes integrated case management within primary care, require further evaluation.
    International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 07/2009; 25(7):657-64. DOI:10.1002/gps.2405 · 3.09 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although a growing body of literature supports the expansion of patient and family involvement in healthcare processes, little attention has thus far been directed at activating geriatric home care patients and/or families to be more effective in managing health-related activities. In this manuscript we consider the unique needs, attributes, and circumstances of the geriatric home care population in conjunction with patient, family, provider, and organizational interventions with a primary or secondary objective of activating patients and/or families. We summarize what has been learned from these efforts, with attention to feasibility and potential applicability to geriatric home care.
    Journal for Healthcare Quality 03/2009; 31(2):24-33. DOI:10.1111/j.1945-1474.2009.00016.x