Table 3.
Reported outcomes in 17 included randomised controlled trials (listed alphabetically by type of rehabilitation) of inpatient rehabilitation programmes specifically designed for geriatric patients
| Reported short term (at discharge) outcomes | Reported longer term (at 3-12 month follow-up) outcomes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Functional improvement (instrument used)* | Nursing home admission | Mortality | Functional improvement (instrument used)* | Nursing home admission | Mortality | Length of follow-up to outcome measurement (months) | |||
| General geriatric rehabilitation | |||||||||
| Applegate 1990 | No | Yes | No | ADL score | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Cohen 2002 | Katz index | No | No | Katz index | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Fleming 2004 | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Karppi 1995 | No | No | No | Katz index | Yes | Yes | 3 (function), 12 (nursing home admission, mortality) | ||
| Rubenstein 1984 | No | Yes | Yes | Personal self maintenance scale | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Saltvedt 2002 | No | Yes | Yes | Barthel index | Yes | Yes | 6 (nursing home admission), 12 (function, mortality) | ||
| White 1994 | Katz index | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Discharge | ||
| Young 2007 | Barthel index† | No | Yes | Barthel index† | Yes | Yes | 6 | ||
| Orthopaedic geriatric rehabilitation | |||||||||
| Cameron 1993 | No | No | No | Barthel index | Yes | No | 4 | ||
| Gilchrist 1988 | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | 6 | ||
| Huusko 2002 | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Kennie 1988 | Katz index | Yes | Yes | Katz index | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Naglie 2002 | No | Yes | Yes | Barthel index | Yes | Yes | 6 | ||
| Shyu 2005 | Barthel index | Yes | Yes | Barthel index | Yes | Yes | 3 | ||
| Stenvall 2007 | Katz index | Yes | Yes | Katz index | Yes | Yes | 12 | ||
| Swanson 1998 | Barthel index | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | 6 | ||
| Vidan 2005 | Katz index | No | Yes | Katz index | No | Yes | 3 (function), 12 (mortality) | ||
ADL=activities of daily living.
*See methods for references of functional status measures.
†Functional status outcomes reported for only one study site (intervention group n=79, control group n=141).