Cited by 223Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

Effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions in delaying the institutionalization of patients with dementia: a meta-analysis

Spijker, Anouk, Vernooij‐Dassen, Myrra, Vasse, Emmelyne, Adang, Eddy, Wollersheim, Hub, Grol, Richard, Verhey, Frans·2008·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

Contemporary healthcare policies are designed to shape the conditions that can help delay the institutionalization of patients with dementia. This can be done by developing support programs that minimize healthcare risks for the patients with dementia and their informal caregivers. Many support programs have been developed, and some of them are effective, but there has been no systematic review with a meta-analysis of all types of nonpharmacological support programs with odds of institutionalization or time to institutionalization as an outcome measure. A systematic review with a meta-analysis was therefore conducted to estimate the overall effectiveness of nonpharmacological support programs for caregivers and patients with dementia that are intended to delay institutionalization. Thirteen support programs with a total of 9,043 patients were included in the meta-analyses. The estimated overall effectiveness suggests that these programs significantly decrease the odds of institutionalization (odds ratio (OR)=0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.43-0.99, P=.05) and significantly increase the time to institutionalization (standardized mean difference (SMD)=1.44, 95% CI=0.07-2.81, P=.04). A meta-analysis of the best-quality studies still showed a positive significant result for the odds of institutionalization (OR=0.60, 95% CI=0.43-0.85, P=.004), although the time to institutionalization was no longer significant (SMD=1.55, 95% CI=-0.35- 3.45, P=.11). The analysis of the intervention characteristics showed that actively involving caregivers in making choices about treatments distinguishes effective from ineffective support programs. Further investigation should be directed toward calculating the potential efficiency of these support programs by applying net-benefit or cost-effectiveness analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01705.x

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spijker, A., Vernooij‐Dassen, M., Vasse, E., Adang, E., Wollersheim, H., Grol, R., & Verhey, F.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Spijker, Anouk
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-04-11
Volume
56
Issue
6
Pages
1116-1128
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W2139614216
Cited by
223
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 14
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
dementia, institutionalization, non-pharmacological treatment, caregiver support programs, informal caregivers, healthcare policy
MeSH terms
Aged, Australia, Dementia, Europe, Humans, North America, Social Support, Treatment Outcome, Caregivers, Disease Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review