Table 2.
Effects of preventive home visits to elderly people living in the community. Values are numbers in intervention (control) group
| Study (country) | Follow up period | No | Physical function | Psychosocial function | Effect on falls | Admissions to institutions during follow up | Mortality in follow up period |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carpenter et al9 (UK) | 3 years | 272 (267) | No significant effects on disability score | Not assessed | Significant favourable effects: 12 (36)* | Not assessed† | Not signficant |
| Fabacher et al11 (USA) | 1 year | 131 (123) | Significant favourable effects on instrumental activities of daily living; no significant effects on acitivities of daily living | Not assessed | Not significant | No significant effects on admissions to hospital and nursing homes | Not significant |
| Hall et al13 (Canada) | 3 years | 81(86/81) | Not assessed | No significant effects on Memorial University happiness scale, health locus of control, MacMillan health opinion index, University of California at Los Angeles loneliness scale, social readjustment rating scale | Not assessed | Not assessed‡ | Not assessed‡ |
| Hendriksen et al15 (Denmark) | 3 years | 285 (287) | Not assessed | Not assessed | Not assessed | Significant favourable effects for admissions to hospital: 219 (271); no significant effects on admissions to nursing homes | Significant favourable effects for subjects in intervention group: 56 (75) |
| Luker17 (UK) | 5 months | 60 (60) | Significant favourable effects on health problem status | No significant effects on life satisfaction index-A | Not assessed | Not assessed | Not assessed |
| McEwan et al18 (UK) | 20 months | 151 (145) | No significant effects on elicited health problems, activities of daily living§, energy, pain, sleep, or mobility | Significant favourable effects on attitude to own ageing, loneliness, isolation, emotional reaction; no significant effects on agitation | Not assessed | Not assessed | Not significant |
| Pathy et al19 (UK) | 3 years | 369 (356) | Significant favourable effects on self rated health; no significant effects on Townsend score or Nottingham health profile | No significant effects on life satisfaction index | Not assessed | No significant effects on admission to hospital, or long term institutional care | Significant favourable effects for subjects in intervention group: 67 (86) |
| Van Rossum et al23 (Netherlands) | 3 years | 292 (288) | No significant effects on self rated health, health complaints, instrumental activities of daily living, or activities of daily living | No significant effects on wellbeing, loneliness, or depressive complaints | Not significant | No significant effects on admission to hospital¶ or long term institutional care | Not significant |
| Sorensen and Sivertsen25 (Denmark) | 3 years | 585 (777/140) | No significant effects on subjective health or functional ability | No significant effects on loneliness or quality of life | Not assessed | No significant effects on admission to hospital or institutional care | Not significant |
| Stuck et al26 (USA) | 3 years | 215 (199) | Significant favourable effects on basic activities of daily living; no significant effects on instrumental activities of daily living | Not assessed | Not assessed | Significant favourable effects on admission to permanent nursing home: 9 (20); no significant effects on admission to hospital or short term nursing home | Not significant |
| Tinetti et al29 (USA) | 1 year | 153 (148) | Significant favourable effects on impairments in balance, toilet transfer skills, and gait; no significant effects on sickness impact profile (ambulation and mobility), postural hypotension, or impairments in leg strength or motion and arm strength or motion | Not assessed | Significant favourable effects: 52 (68)** | No significant effects on admissions to hospital | Not significant |
| Vetter et al31 (Gwent, UK) | 2 years | 296 (298) | No significant effects on physical disability or mobility | No significant effects on anxiety scores, depression, quality of life, or social contacts | Not assessed | Not assessed | Significant favourable effects: 35 (60) |
| Vetter et al31 (Powys, UK) | 2 years | 281 (273) | No significant effects on physical disability or mobility | No significant effects on anxiety scores, depression, quality of life, or social contacts | Not assessed | Not assessed | Not significant |
| Vetter et al32 (UK) | 4 years | 350 (324) | Not assessed | Not assessed | Not significant | Not assessed | Not significant |
| Wagner et al33 (USA) | 2 years | 635 (317/607) | No significant effects on restricted activity days‡‡, bed days, or medical outcomes study physical limitations scale | Not assessed | Not significant | Not assessed | Not significant |
Number of falls in month before interview.
Substantial difference between study and control group in number of admissions in three year study period (335 v 252), but no significance test of this difference was reported; there were, however, significantly more long term (>6 months) admissions in control group.
Hall et al tested the difference between “living at home” v “died or admitted to facility”: this difference was significant between intervention group and first control group.
In one of 10 measured activities of daily living a significant reduction in experienced problems was observed; this difference, however, was also present at baseline.
Van Rossum also calculated risk of being admitted to hospital (subjects in control group had 40% increased risk of being admitted to hospital); this difference was significant.
Number of falls during one year follow up.
Only exception was that experimental group had significantly lower proportion of participants who reported an increased number of restricted activity days than visit only group.