Premium
Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials in Australian Nursing Homes from 2000 to 2018
Author(s) -
Pham Tony,
Bugeja Lyndal,
Holmes Alice,
Ibrahim Joseph E.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of the american geriatrics society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.992
H-Index - 232
eISSN - 1532-5415
pISSN - 0002-8614
DOI - 10.1111/jgs.16944
Subject(s) - medicine , randomized controlled trial , interquartile range , psychological intervention , family medicine , systematic review , consolidated standards of reporting trials , health care , medline , nursing , surgery , political science , law , economics , economic growth
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES High‐quality research provides an evidence base for optimal practice care in clinical settings, yet, little is known about the nature and extent of randomized control trials (RCTs) conducted in Australian nursing homes (NHs). Research from other settings and other countries is not necessarily transferable to the Australian NH sector. We sought to identify and describe RCTs conducted in Australia which investigated interventions targeted at improving care for NH residents. DESIGN The design of this study comprised a systematic literature search with a narrative review. Studies were included if they were RCTs published after 2000, conducted in an Australian NH, and evaluated a health intervention which may have directly or indirectly benefitted the NH resident. SETTING Australian NHs. PARTICIPANTS Nursing home residents. MEASUREMENTS Jurisdiction (state or territory where the study was conducted), number of NHs recruited in each trial, number of residents included in each trial, intervention characteristics, comparator characteristics, and characteristics of outcome. RESULTS Only 43 articles reporting on 39 RCTs were identified. In contrast, 30 Australian musculoskeletal RCTs were published in just 2 years (2011–2012). Most of the RCTs identified were conducted in New South Wales (n = 14), Queensland (n = 10), and Victoria (n = 9). The mean number of NHs included in each trial was 22.4 (standard deviation (SD) = 27.0), with a median of 14.5 (interquartile range (IQR) = 27.8), while the mean number of residents included was 412.4 (SD = 921) with a median of 187 (IQR = 341.0). The most common interventions targeted: managing dementia (n = 20), prevention of falls (n = 7), and addressing mental health issues (n = 6). CONCLUSION This review provides evidence of the paucity of high‐quality research in the form of RCTs, in the Australian NH setting and demonstrates the need for Australia to improve its research capability in the NH sector.