Table 1.
Study characteristics of the included studies (n = 20)
| Author (year) | Study aim | Design and follow-up | Setting | Study population criteria | Sample |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States of America | |||||
| Galik et al. (2014)a | To determine the effect of Function-Focused Care for the Cognitively Impaired on function, physical activity, behaviour, and falls |
Cluster-RCT Follow-up 3 and 6 months |
Institutionalised long-term care |
• ≥ 55 years old • MMSE-score ≤ 15 • Living in nursing home • Expected to stay in nursing home for at least 6 months |
Mean age 83.7 (9.9), 77% female IG n = 53 CG n = 50 |
| Galik et al. (2015) | To determine the effect of Function-Focused Care for the Cognitively Impaired on function, physical activity, behaviour, and falls |
Cluster-RCT Follow-up 3 and 6 months |
Institutionalised long-term care (dementia-specific) |
• ≥ 55 years old • MMSE-score ≤ 15 • Living in assisted living • Expected to stay in assisted living for at least 6 months |
Mean age 83.7 (7.2), 65% female IG n = 48 CG n = 48 |
| Gitlin et al. (2006)a | To determine the effect of a multicomponent intervention to reduce functional difficulties, fear of falling, and home hazards and enhance self-efficacy and adaptive coping in older adults with chronic conditions |
RCT Follow-up 6 and 12 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 70 years old • Cognitively intact • Not receiving home care • Having trouble with 2 iADLs or ≥ 1 ADLs • Not completely dependent or homebound • Not receiving services to address functional problems |
Mean age 79 (5.9), 82% female IG n = 160 CG n = 159 |
| Gitlin et al. (2010)a | To determine the effect of a non-pharmacologic, bio behavioural approach (COPE) to support physical function and quality of life for patients with dementia and the well-being of their caregivers |
RCT Follow-up 4 and 9 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 21 years old • Diagnosis of dementia • Needing help with daily activities or having behavioural symptoms • Lived with or within 5 miles of family caregivers • Not having terminal illness, active cancer treatment, more than 3 acute hospitalisations in the past year, diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, dementia secondary to head trauma, MMSE-score of 0 or bed-bound mobility |
Mean age 82.4 (8.9), 68% female IG n = 102 CG n = 107 |
| Resnick et al. (2011) | To determine the effect of Function-Focused Care Assisted Living to alter the decline that AL-clients experience |
Cluster-RCT Follow-up 4 and 12 months |
Institutionalised long-term care |
• ≥ 65 years old • MMSE-score ≥ 11 • Living in assisted living • Not in hospice or rehabilitation |
Mean age 87.7 (5.7), 80% female IG n = 93 CG n = 78 |
| Szanton et al. (2019)a | To determine the effect whether a 10-session, home-based, interdisciplinary programme (CAPABLE) reduces disability |
RCT Follow-up 5 and 12 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Cognitively intact • Reporting difficulty with at least 1 ADL or ≥ 2 iADLs • Income < 200% of federal poverty level • Not having active cancer treatment, more than 3 acute hospitalisations in the past year, inability to stand, apartment dwelling, plans to move within a year or use of home-based physical or occupational therapy services at enrolment |
Mean age 75.7 (7.6), 88% female IG n = 152 CG n = 148 |
| Tinetti et al. (2002)a | To determine the effect on functional status and the likelihood of remaining at home for persons receiving restorative care |
CCT Follow-up every 60 day, and at discharge from homecare (average 35 days) |
Community care |
• ≥ 65 years old •Receiving home care •At risk for functional decline after acute illness or hospitalisation but potential for maintaining or improving their function •Not having severe cognitive impairment, requiring total assistance with care or bed-bound mobility |
Mean age 79.8 (6.9), 59% female IG n = 691 CG n = 691 |
| New Zealand | |||||
| Kerse et al. (2008) | To determine the effect of an activity programme (PIRC) in improving function, quality of life, and falls in older people in residential care |
Cluster-RCT Follow-up 6 and 12 months |
Institutionalised long-term care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Cognitively able to set and remember goals to be achieved • Needing assistance with most iADLs and ≥ 2 ADLs • Can usually ambulate to some degree and feed themselves • Not unable to communicate, having anxiety as main diagnosis, acutely unwell or in case of terminal illness |
Mean age 84 (7.0), 75% female IG n = 330 CG n = 352 |
| King et al. (2012) | To determine the effect of a long-term restorative home care service |
Cluster-RCT Follow-up 4 and 7 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Receiving assistance from the home care agency • Not unable to participate in interviews due to poor health |
Mean age 79.4 (6.4), 76% female IG n = 93 CG n = 93 |
| Parsons et al. (2017) | To determine the effect of a restorative home support service on institutional-free survival in frail older people referred for needs assessment |
RCT Follow-up at regular intervals over 24 months, not specified |
Community care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Assessed at high risk of permanent institutional care • Not needing nursing home placement |
Mean age 83.1 (7.5), 61% female IG n = 56 CG n = 57 |
| Parsons et al. (2020) | To determine the effect whether early Supported Discharge Teams (SDT) for older people admitted to hospital following a fracture enables earlier discharge from hospital and reduces readmissions and healthcare costs |
RCT Follow-up 12 months |
Hospital to community care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Suffered an injury requiring hospital admission • In hospital at time of referral • Not requiring ongoing acute hospital-based treatment |
Mean age 80.8 (8.1), 75% female IG n = 201 CG n = 202 |
| Australia | |||||
| Lewin and Vandermeulen (2010)a | To determine the effect of Home Independence Programme (HIP) on promoting functional dependency, morale, confidence in performing everyday activities without falling and functional mobility |
CCT Follow-up 3 and 12 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 60 years old • Referred for home care services • Existing home care clients who request an increase in level or amount of service • Not having cognitive impairment, other progressive neurological disorders or when in need for acute or post-acute care |
Mean age 79.7 (5.9), 75% female IG n = 100 CG n = 100 |
| Lewin et al. (2013)a | To determine the effect of a new paradigm for home care (HIP) |
RCT Follow-up 3 and 12 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Referred for home care services • Existing home care clients needing an increase of service • Needing assistance with one or more ADLs because of an ongoing disability • Not having terminal illness, cognitive impairment due to dementia or progressive neurological disorder |
Mean age 82.3 (7.4), 67% female IG n = 375 CG n = 375 |
| United Kingdom | |||||
| Powell et al. (2002)a | To determine the effect of an interdisciplinary community-based outreach rehabilitation after severe traumatic brain injury |
RCT Follow-up at end of treatment (average 24 months) |
Community care |
• Between 16 and 65 years old • Sustained traumatic brain injury • Referred from home or discharge at hospital • With long-term treatment goals to improve independence in activities of daily living, social participation, and psychological wellbeing • Severity of injury was at least moderate • No concurrent neurological disorders |
Mean age 34.5 (10.5), 22% female IG n = 48 CG n = 46 |
| Sackley et al. (2009) | To determine the effect of a programme of physiotherapy and occupational therapy in care home residents with mobility limitations dependent on carers in some ADLs |
Cluster-RCT Follow-up 3 and 6 months |
Institutionalised long-term care |
• Living in a care home • Experiencing limitations in mobility or ADL • BI-score between 6 and 16 • No admissions to hospital, nursing home or hospice |
Mean age 85.0 (8.5), 74% female IG n = 128 CG n = 121 |
| Sweden, Norway, Denmark | |||||
| Gronstedt et al. (2013) | To determine the effect of individually tailored physical and daily activities in nursing home residents on ADL and balance |
RCT Follow-up 3 months |
Institutionalised long-term care |
• ≥ 64 years old • In need of daily assistance of minimum one personal ADL due to physical disability • Expected to stay in nursing home for at least 3 months |
Mean age 85.0 (7.7), 74% female IG n = 170 CG n = 152 Sweden n = 85 Norway n = 171 Denmark n = 66 |
| Norway | |||||
| Langeland et al. (2019)a | To determine the effect of reablement in home-dwelling adults on daily activities, physical function, health-related quality of life and coping as a sense of coherence |
Multi-centre CCT Follow-up 10 weeks, 6 and 12 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 18 years old • Experiencing functional decline • Not having terminal illness, cognitive impairment or in need for institution-based rehabilitation or nursing home placement |
Mean age 78.4 (10.9), 69% female IG n = 707 CG n = 121 |
| Tuntland et al. (2015)a | To determine the effect on self-perceived activity performance and satisfaction with performance, physical functioning, and health-related quality of life |
RCT Follow-up 3 and 9 months |
Community care |
• ≥ 18 years old • Referred for home-based services based on their self-reported activity limitations • Not having terminal illness, cognitive impairment or in need of institution-based rehabilitation or nursing home placement |
Mean age 79 (10.1), 69% female IG n = 31 CG n = 30 |
| The Netherlands | |||||
| Henskens et al. (2017) | To determine the effect of Movement-oriented Restorative Care in preservation of ADL independence and quality of life in nursing home residents with dementia |
CCT Follow-up 3, 6, 9 and 12 months |
Institutionalised long-term care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Diagnosis of dementia • Living in a psychogeriatric ward for at least 3 weeks • Not having bad vision, psychotic symptoms, very severe dementia, MMSE-score of ≥ 24 or medical contraindications for physical activities |
Mean age 85.6 (6.2), 76% female IG n = 40 CG n = 26 |
| Rooijackers et al. (2021) | To determine the effect of Stay Active at Home on sedentary behaviour in older homecare clients | RCT | Community care |
• ≥ 65 years old • Receiving home care services • Not unable to communicate, having terminal illness, bed-bound mobility or having cognitive or psychological impairment |
Mean age 82.1 (6.9), 67.8% female IG n = 133 CG n = 131 |
RCT randomised controlled trial, CCT clinical controlled trial, MMSE mini-mental state examination, BI Barthel Index, IG intervention group, CG control group
aStudy effective on improving ADL functioning