Home › Research › Clinical safety
Occupational therapy for community dwelling elderly people: a systematic review
Steultjens EM, Dekker J, Bouter LM, Jellema S, Bakker EB, van den Ende CH.. Age and ageing, 2004-09-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objective Occupational therapy might play an important role in maintaining independent living for community dwelling elderly people. The aim of this systematic review is to determine whether occupational therapy improves outcome for people who are >/=60 years and are living independently. Methods An extensive search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, AMED and SCISEARCH until July 2002 was performed. Studies with controlled and uncontrolled designs were included. Six intervention categories were distinguished and individually analysed using a best-evidence synthesis, based on the type of design, the methodological quality, type of outcome measures and statistical significance of findings. Results 17 studies were included, ten of which were randomised clinical trials. Six randomised clinical trials had a high methodological quality. Strong evidence is present for the efficacy of advising on assistive devices as part of a home hazards assessment on functional ability. There is some evidence for the efficacy of training of skills combined with a home hazard assessment in decreasing the incidence of falls in elderly people at high risk of falling. Some evidence is available for the efficacy of comprehensive occupational therapy on functional ability, social participation and quality of life. Insufficient evidence is present for the efficacy of counselling the primary caregiver of dementia patients about maintaining the patient's functional abilities. Conclusion This review shows that occupational therapy interventions for community dwelling elderly people results in positive outcomes. Future research in the efficacy of occupational therapy in elderly patient groups such as people with dementia is recommended. Furthermore, research into tailoring interventions to the needs of elderly patients is recommended.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Steultjens, E. M., Dekker, J., Bouter, L. M., Jellema, S., Bakker, E. B., & van den Ende, C. H. (2004). Occupational therapy for community dwelling elderly people: a systematic review. Age and ageing. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afh174
Vancouver
Steultjens EM, Dekker J, Bouter LM, Jellema S, Bakker EB, van den Ende CH. Occupational therapy for community dwelling elderly people: a systematic review. Age and ageing. 2004. doi:10.1093/ageing/afh174. PMID: 15315918.
BibTeX
@article{steultjens2004-15315918,
author = {Steultjens, E. M. and Dekker, J. and Bouter, L. M. and Jellema, S. and Bakker, E. B. and van den Ende, C. H.},
title = {{Occupational therapy for community dwelling elderly people: a systematic review}},
journal = {Age and ageing},
year = {2004},
doi = {10.1093/ageing/afh174},
pmid = {15315918},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afh174}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results 17 studies were included, ten of which were randomised clinical trials.
- Conclusion This review shows that occupational therapy interventions for community dwelling elderly people results in positive outcomes.
Study details
- Study designsystematic review
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Age and ageing) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A systematic review of all the studies on the question |
| 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 | 2004 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| 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 15315918) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 37 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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 Clinical safety
Also tagged “delirium”
858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.