Preventive Home Visits for Mortality, Morbidity, and Institutionalization in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

BackgroundHome visits for older adults aim to prevent cognitive and functional impairment, thus reducing institutionalization and mortality. Visitors may provide information, investigate untreated problems, encourage medication compliance, and provide referrals to services.Methods and Findings Data Sources: Ten databases including CENTRAL and Medline searched through December 2012. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials enrolling community-dwelling persons without dementia aged over 65 years. Interventions included visits at home by a health or social care professional that were not related to hospital discharge. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors independently extracted data. Outcomes were pooled using random effects. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality, institutionalization, hospitalization, falls, injuries, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, quality of life, and psychiatric illness.ResultsSixty-four studies with 28642 participants were included. Home visits were not associated with absolute reductions in mortality at longest follow-up, but some programs may have small relative effects (relative risk = 0.93 [0.87 to 0.99]; absolute risk = 0.00 [−0.01 to 0.00]). There was moderate quality evidence of no overall effect on the number of people institutionalized (RR = 1.02 [0.88 to 1.18]) or hospitalized (RR = 0.96 [0.91 to 1.01]). There was high quality evidence for number of people who fell, which is consistent with no effect or a small effect (odds ratio = 0.86 [0.73 to 1.01]), but there was no evidence that these interventions increased independent living. There was low and very low quality evidence of effects for quality of life (standardised mean difference = −0.06 [−0.11 to −0.01]) and physical functioning (SMD = −0.10 [−0.17 to −0.03]) respectively, but these may not be clinically important.ConclusionsHome visiting is not consistently associated with differences in mortality or independent living, and investigations of heterogeneity did not identify any programs that are associated with consistent benefits. Due to poor reporting of intervention components and delivery, we cannot exclude the possibility that some programs may be effective.

Effects of substituting nurse practitioners, physician assistants or nurses for physicians concerning healthcare for the ageing population: a systematic literature review

“…Also in primary healthcare for the ageing population, NPs, PAs and nurses provide proactive care. However, contrary to expectations, the effects of this proactive care strongly vary across studies (Patrick et al 2006, Rubenstein et al 2007, Bouman et al 2008, Liebel et al 2009, Tappenden et al 2012, Metzelthin et al 2013, Mayo-Wilson et al 2014. These mixed results might be related to the different goals and designs of proactive care.…”

“…, , Mayo‐Wilson et al . ). These mixed results might be related to the different goals and designs of proactive care.…”

Exploring Home Care Interventions for Frail Older People in Belgium: A Comparative Effectiveness Study

“…This is consistent with the literature and shows the added value of CM to coordinate care for people with complex needs and to support informal caregivers, provided it is combined with other services. As demonstrated by a meta‐analysis, preventive home visits with no extra services had no effect on rates of institutionalization, as opposed to CM, which reduced admissions to nursing homes in some studies . Another meta‐analysis showed significant positive effects in seven of 11 randomized controlled trials and two comparative studies.…”

Costs and Effects of an Ambulatory Geriatric Unit (the AGe-FIT Study): A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…18 The lack of an effect on HRQoL is also in agreement with previous studies. 40,42 This result may reflect participants' poor health status and thus low overall HRQoL, and the limited ability to improve these aspects of health.…”