Cargando…

Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure

BACKGROUND: Residential care infrastructure, in terms of the characteristics of the organisation (such as proprietary status, size, and location) and the physical environment, have been found to directly influence resident outcomes. This review aimed to summarise the existing literature of economic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Easton, Tiffany, Milte, Rachel, Crotty, Maria, Ratcliffe, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5361718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28327120
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2165-8
_version_ 1782516821375582208
author Easton, Tiffany
Milte, Rachel
Crotty, Maria
Ratcliffe, Julie
author_facet Easton, Tiffany
Milte, Rachel
Crotty, Maria
Ratcliffe, Julie
author_sort Easton, Tiffany
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Residential care infrastructure, in terms of the characteristics of the organisation (such as proprietary status, size, and location) and the physical environment, have been found to directly influence resident outcomes. This review aimed to summarise the existing literature of economic evaluations of residential care infrastructure. METHODS: A systematic review of English language articles using AgeLine, CINAHL, Econlit, Informit (databases in Health; Business and Law; Social Sciences), Medline, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science with retrieval up to 14 December 2015. The search strategy combined terms relating to nursing homes, economics, and older people. Full economic evaluations, partial economic evaluations, and randomised trials reporting more limited economic information, such as estimates of resource use or costs of interventions were included. Data was extracted using predefined data fields and synthesized in a narrative summary to address the stated review objective. RESULTS: Fourteen studies containing an economic component were identified. None of the identified studies attempted to systematically link costs and outcomes in the form of a cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility analysis. There was a wide variation in approaches taken for valuing the outcomes associated with differential residential care infrastructures: 8 studies utilized various clinical outcomes as proxies for the quality of care provided, and 2 focused on resident outcomes including agitation, quality of life, and the quality of care interactions. Only 2 studies included residents living with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Robust economic evidence is needed to inform aged care facility design. Future research should focus on identifying appropriate and meaningful outcome measures that can be used at a service planning level, as well as the broader health benefits and cost-saving potential of different organisational and environmental characteristics in residential care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42015015977. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2165-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5361718
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53617182017-03-24 Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure Easton, Tiffany Milte, Rachel Crotty, Maria Ratcliffe, Julie BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Residential care infrastructure, in terms of the characteristics of the organisation (such as proprietary status, size, and location) and the physical environment, have been found to directly influence resident outcomes. This review aimed to summarise the existing literature of economic evaluations of residential care infrastructure. METHODS: A systematic review of English language articles using AgeLine, CINAHL, Econlit, Informit (databases in Health; Business and Law; Social Sciences), Medline, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science with retrieval up to 14 December 2015. The search strategy combined terms relating to nursing homes, economics, and older people. Full economic evaluations, partial economic evaluations, and randomised trials reporting more limited economic information, such as estimates of resource use or costs of interventions were included. Data was extracted using predefined data fields and synthesized in a narrative summary to address the stated review objective. RESULTS: Fourteen studies containing an economic component were identified. None of the identified studies attempted to systematically link costs and outcomes in the form of a cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, or cost-utility analysis. There was a wide variation in approaches taken for valuing the outcomes associated with differential residential care infrastructures: 8 studies utilized various clinical outcomes as proxies for the quality of care provided, and 2 focused on resident outcomes including agitation, quality of life, and the quality of care interactions. Only 2 studies included residents living with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Robust economic evidence is needed to inform aged care facility design. Future research should focus on identifying appropriate and meaningful outcome measures that can be used at a service planning level, as well as the broader health benefits and cost-saving potential of different organisational and environmental characteristics in residential care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number CRD42015015977. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2165-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5361718/ /pubmed/28327120 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2165-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Easton, Tiffany
Milte, Rachel
Crotty, Maria
Ratcliffe, Julie
Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
title Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
title_full Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
title_fullStr Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
title_full_unstemmed Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
title_short Where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
title_sort where’s the evidence? a systematic review of economic analyses of residential aged care infrastructure
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5361718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28327120
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2165-8
work_keys_str_mv AT eastontiffany wherestheevidenceasystematicreviewofeconomicanalysesofresidentialagedcareinfrastructure
AT milterachel wherestheevidenceasystematicreviewofeconomicanalysesofresidentialagedcareinfrastructure
AT crottymaria wherestheevidenceasystematicreviewofeconomicanalysesofresidentialagedcareinfrastructure
AT ratcliffejulie wherestheevidenceasystematicreviewofeconomicanalysesofresidentialagedcareinfrastructure