Routine Data Indicators of Treatment for Dementia and Old-Age Depression

Godemann, F.; Wolff-Menzler, Claus; Löhr, Michael; Wiegand, Hauke Felix

doi:10.1024/1662-9647/a000163

Cited by 1 publication

(10 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One checklist is for evaluating observational cohort and cross-sectional studies, 14 32 Sixteen studies were observational, that is, one longitudinal, 20 four prospective, 9,21,24,28 and 11 retrospective. 17,27 Studies were conducted at different levels in terms of sample scales, including three national-level, 22,24,25 four state or regional, 8,18,30,31 four multisite, 16,17,19,26 and eight single-site studies. 17,27 Studies were conducted at different levels in terms of sample scales, including three national-level, 22,24,25 four state or regional, 8,18,30,31 four multisite, 16,17,19,26 and eight single-site studies.…”

Section: Quality Appraisal Of Reviewed Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8,16,18,19,22,23,25,[29][30][31][32] Three were intervention studies, that is, one randomized controlled trial (RCT) 26 and two quasiexperimental studies. 9,20,21,23,[27][28][29]32 Various data sources were used, including patient medical records (n = 12, 67%), 9,16,17,[19][20][21]23,[26][27][28][29]31,32 billing and/or claims files (n = 6, 33%), 8,16,18,20,22,25 registry data (n = 5, 28%), 9,16,24,30,31 and surveys and/or interviews (n = 9, 50%). 9,20,21,23,[27][28]…”

Section: Quality Appraisal Of Reviewed Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 describes the characteristics of the 19 studies reviewed in this paper. These studies were conducted in various regions/countries, including nine studies (47%) in the United States, 8,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] five (26%) in Europe, 9,[24][25][26][27] two (11%) in Asia, 28,29 two (11%) in Australia, 30,31 and…”

Section: Quality Appraisal Of Reviewed Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…32 Sixteen studies were observational, that is, one longitudinal, 20 four prospective, 9,21,24,28 and 11 retrospective. 8,16,18,19,22,23,25,[29][30][31][32] Three were intervention studies, that is, one randomized controlled trial (RCT) 26 and two quasiexperimental studies. 17,27 Studies were conducted at different levels in terms of sample scales, including three national-level, 22,24,25 four state or regional, 8,18,30,31 four multisite, 16,17,19,26 and eight single-site studies.…”

Section: Key Pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8,16,18,19,22,23,25,[29][30][31][32] Three were intervention studies, that is, one randomized controlled trial (RCT) 26 and two quasiexperimental studies. 17,27 Studies were conducted at different levels in terms of sample scales, including three national-level, 22,24,25 four state or regional, 8,18,30,31 four multisite, 16,17,19,26 and eight single-site studies. 9,20,21,23,[27][28][29]32 Various data sources were used, including patient medical records (n = 12, 67%), 9,16,17,[19][20][21]23,[26][27][28][29]31,32 billing and/or claims files (n = 6, 33%), 8,16,18,…”

Section: Key Pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Hospital readmission in persons with dementia: A systematic review

Bao

Dull

et al. 2019

Int J Geriat Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Hospital readmission in persons with dementia is becoming a critical safety and cost issue. The purpose of this review is to systematically assess published evidence on hospital readmissions in persons with dementia, including rate, clinical reasons, risk factors, and prevention programs. Methods A systematic review of relevant literature was conducted. Literature were searched in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase as well as hand searching. Quality of reviewed studies were assessed independently by reviewers using quality assessment checklists. Results Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. In persons with dementia, all‐cause 30‐day readmission rate was most frequently reported and ranged from 7% to 35%. Compared with those without dementia, persons with dementia had significantly higher rate of readmission. Reported risk factors of readmission varied across studies from patient sociodemographic and clinical status, history of health care utilization, to family caregivers. Reasons for readmission were rarely documented. Programs of home‐based individualized care and interdisciplinary team care were used for preventing readmissions. Findings from some of the studies were limited by small sample sizes, single data source, and other methodologic flaws. Conclusions Persons with dementia are at high risk for hospital readmission, but many of the readmissions are potentially preventable. Multiple strategies such like identifying high‐risk individuals and the clinical reasons for index admission and readmission and implementing home‐based individualized care by interdisciplinary team can reduce preventable hospital readmissions. Future studies should use multiple national data sources and advanced methodology to identify risk factors and clinical reasons of hospital readmissions.

show abstract