Home › Research › Caregiving
Community occupational therapy for older patients with dementia and their care givers: cost effectiveness study
Graff MJ, Adang EM, Vernooij-Dassen MJ, Dekker J, Jönsson L, Thijssen M, Hoefnagels WH, Rikkert MG.. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2008-01-02
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Objective To assess the cost effectiveness of community based occupational therapy compared with usual care in older patients with dementia and their care givers from a societal viewpoint. Design Cost effectiveness study alongside a single blind randomised controlled trial. Setting Memory clinic, day clinic of a geriatrics department, and participants' homes. Patients 135 patients aged > or =65 with mild to moderate dementia living in the community and their primary care givers. Intervention 10 sessions of occupational therapy over five weeks, including cognitive and behavioural interventions, to train patients in the use of aids to compensate for cognitive decline and care givers in coping behaviours and supervision. Main outcome measures Incremental cost effectiveness ratio expressed as the difference in mean total care costs per successful treatment (that is, a combined patient and care giver outcome measure of clinically relevant improvement on process, performance, and competence scales) at three months after randomisation. Bootstrap methods used to determine confidence intervals for these measures. Results The intervention cost 1183 euros (848 pounds sterling, $1738) (95% confidence interval 1128 euros (808 pounds sterling, $1657) to 1239 euros (888 pounds sterling, $1820)) per patient and primary care giver unit at three months. Visits to general practitioners and hospital doctors cost the same in both groups but total mean costs were 1748 euros (1279 pounds sterling, $2621) lower in the intervention group, with the main cost savings in informal care. There was a significant difference in proportions of successful treatments of 36% at three months. The number needed to treat for successful treatment at three months was 2.8 (2.7 to 2.9). Conclusions Community occupational therapy intervention for patients with dementia and their care givers is successful and cost effective, especially in terms of informal care giving.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Graff, M. J., Adang, E. M., Vernooij-Dassen, M. J., Dekker, J., Jönsson, L., Thijssen, M., et al. (2008). Community occupational therapy for older patients with dementia and their care givers: cost effectiveness study. BMJ (Clinical research ed.). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39408.481898.be
Vancouver
Graff MJ, Adang EM, Vernooij-Dassen MJ, Dekker J, Jönsson L, Thijssen M, et al. Community occupational therapy for older patients with dementia and their care givers: cost effectiveness study. BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 2008. doi:10.1136/bmj.39408.481898.be. PMID: 18171718.
BibTeX
@article{graff2008-18171718,
author = {Graff, M. J. and Adang, E. M. and Vernooij-Dassen, M. J. and Dekker, J. and Jönsson, L. and Thijssen, M. and Hoefnagels, W. H. and Rikkert, M. G.},
title = {{Community occupational therapy for older patients with dementia and their care givers: cost effectiveness study}},
journal = {BMJ (Clinical research ed.)},
year = {2008},
doi = {10.1136/bmj.39408.481898.be},
pmid = {18171718},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39408.481898.be}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Objective To assess the cost effectiveness of community based occupational therapy compared with usual care in older patients with dementia and their care givers from a societal viewpoint.
- Results The intervention cost 1183 euros (848 pounds sterling, $1738) (95% confidence interval 1128 euros (808 pounds sterling, $1657) to 1239 euros (888 pounds sterling, $1820)) per patient and primary care giver unit at three months.
- There was a significant difference in proportions of successful treatments of 36% at three months.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →
Study details
- Study designrandomized controlled trial
- Participants135
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 78/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 45 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 78 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (BMJ (Clinical research ed.)) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2008 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 135 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 2 / 2 | Randomised and blinded or placebo-controlled (as stated in the record) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 18171718) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 45 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 45 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 78 out of 100. |
| Total | 78 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Caregiving
Also tagged “assisted-living”
199 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assisted-living”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 199 tagged studies.