Cargando…
Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies
The main goal of health services is for the elderly to maintain their mental and physical health and live at home independently for as long as possible. Various technical welfare solutions have been introduced and tested to support an independent life. The aim of this systematic review was to examin...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9931340/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36812629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000184 |
_version_ | 1784889228058951680 |
---|---|
author | Pajalic, Zada de Sousa, Diana Aguiar Strøm, Benedicte Sørensen Lausund, Hilde Breievne, Grete Kisa, Sezer Saplacan, Diana Larsen, Marie Hamilton Jøranson, Nina |
author_facet | Pajalic, Zada de Sousa, Diana Aguiar Strøm, Benedicte Sørensen Lausund, Hilde Breievne, Grete Kisa, Sezer Saplacan, Diana Larsen, Marie Hamilton Jøranson, Nina |
author_sort | Pajalic, Zada |
collection | PubMed |
description | The main goal of health services is for the elderly to maintain their mental and physical health and live at home independently for as long as possible. Various technical welfare solutions have been introduced and tested to support an independent life. The aim of this systematic review was to examine different types of interventions and assess the effectiveness of welfare technology (WT) interventions for older people living at home. This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020190316) and followed the PRISMA statement. Primary randomized control trial (RCT) studies published between 2015 and 2020 were identified through the following databases: Academic, AMED, Cochrane Reviews, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Ovid MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Twelve out of 687 papers met the criteria for eligibility. We used risk-of-bias assessment (RoB 2) for the included studies. Based on the RoB 2 outcomes that showed a high risk of bias (>50%) and high heterogeneity of quantitative data, we decided to narratively summarize the study characteristics, outcome measures, and implications for practice. The included studies were conducted in six countries, namely the USA, Sweden, Korea, Italy, Singapore, and the UK. One was conducted in three European countries (the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland). A total of 8437 participants were sampled, and individual study sample sizes ranged from 12 to 6742. Most of the studies were two-armed RCTs, except for two that were three-armed. The duration of the welfare technology tested in the studies ranged from four weeks to six months. The employed technologies were commercial solutions, including telephones, smartphones, computers, telemonitors, and robots. The type of interventions were balance training, physical exercise and function, cognitive training, monitoring of symptoms, activation of emergency medical systems, self-care, reduction of death risk, and medical alert protection systems. The latter studies were the first of their kind and suggested that physician-led telemonitoring could reduce length of hospital stay. In summary, welfare technology seems to offer solutions to supporting elderly people at home. The results showed a wide range of uses for technologies for improving mental and physical health. All studies showed encouraging results for improving the participants’ health status. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9931340 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99313402023-02-16 Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies Pajalic, Zada de Sousa, Diana Aguiar Strøm, Benedicte Sørensen Lausund, Hilde Breievne, Grete Kisa, Sezer Saplacan, Diana Larsen, Marie Hamilton Jøranson, Nina PLOS Digit Health Research Article The main goal of health services is for the elderly to maintain their mental and physical health and live at home independently for as long as possible. Various technical welfare solutions have been introduced and tested to support an independent life. The aim of this systematic review was to examine different types of interventions and assess the effectiveness of welfare technology (WT) interventions for older people living at home. This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020190316) and followed the PRISMA statement. Primary randomized control trial (RCT) studies published between 2015 and 2020 were identified through the following databases: Academic, AMED, Cochrane Reviews, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Ovid MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Twelve out of 687 papers met the criteria for eligibility. We used risk-of-bias assessment (RoB 2) for the included studies. Based on the RoB 2 outcomes that showed a high risk of bias (>50%) and high heterogeneity of quantitative data, we decided to narratively summarize the study characteristics, outcome measures, and implications for practice. The included studies were conducted in six countries, namely the USA, Sweden, Korea, Italy, Singapore, and the UK. One was conducted in three European countries (the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland). A total of 8437 participants were sampled, and individual study sample sizes ranged from 12 to 6742. Most of the studies were two-armed RCTs, except for two that were three-armed. The duration of the welfare technology tested in the studies ranged from four weeks to six months. The employed technologies were commercial solutions, including telephones, smartphones, computers, telemonitors, and robots. The type of interventions were balance training, physical exercise and function, cognitive training, monitoring of symptoms, activation of emergency medical systems, self-care, reduction of death risk, and medical alert protection systems. The latter studies were the first of their kind and suggested that physician-led telemonitoring could reduce length of hospital stay. In summary, welfare technology seems to offer solutions to supporting elderly people at home. The results showed a wide range of uses for technologies for improving mental and physical health. All studies showed encouraging results for improving the participants’ health status. Public Library of Science 2023-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9931340/ /pubmed/36812629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000184 Text en © 2023 Pajalic et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Pajalic, Zada de Sousa, Diana Aguiar Strøm, Benedicte Sørensen Lausund, Hilde Breievne, Grete Kisa, Sezer Saplacan, Diana Larsen, Marie Hamilton Jøranson, Nina Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies |
title | Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies |
title_full | Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies |
title_fullStr | Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies |
title_short | Welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—A systematic review of RCT studies |
title_sort | welfare technology interventions among older people living at home—a systematic review of rct studies |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9931340/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36812629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000184 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pajaliczada welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT desousadianaaguiar welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT strømbenedictesørensen welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT lausundhilde welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT breievnegrete welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT kisasezer welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT saplacandiana welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT larsenmariehamilton welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies AT jøransonnina welfaretechnologyinterventionsamongolderpeoplelivingathomeasystematicreviewofrctstudies |