TY - JOUR
T1 - The prevalence of non-pharmacological interventions in older homecare recipients
T2 - an overview from six European countries
AU - Kooijmans, Eline C. M.
AU - Hoogendijk, Emiel O.
AU - Pokladníková, Jitka
AU - Smalbil, Louk
AU - Szczerbińska, Katarzyna
AU - Barańska, Ilona
AU - Ziuziakowska, Adrianna
AU - Fialová, Daniela
AU - Onder, Graziano
AU - Declercq, Anja
AU - Finne-Soveri, Harriet
AU - Hoogendoorn, Mark
AU - van Hout, Hein P. J.
AU - Joling, Karlijn J.
N1 - Funding Information: This study was carried out as part of the I-CARE4OLD project. I-CARE4OLD has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 965341. Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. More information on the I-CARE4OLD project can be found at http://www.icare4old.eu and https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/965341 . The IBenC project was funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Commission (Grant no. 305912). The contents of this article reflect only the authors’ views and the European Commission is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. JP and DF were supported by the Cooperation research program of the Faculty of Pharmacy, Charles University, Czech Republic. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Purpose: Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) play an important role in the management of older people receiving homecare. However, little is known about how often specific NPIs are being used and to what extent usage varies between countries. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of NPIs in older homecare recipients in six European countries. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of older homecare recipients (65+) using baseline data from the longitudinal cohort study ‘Identifying best practices for care-dependent elderly by Benchmarking Costs and outcomes of community care’ (IBenC). The analyzed NPIs are based on the interRAI Home Care instrument, a comprehensive geriatric assessment instrument. The prevalence of 24 NPIs was analyzed in Belgium, Germany, Finland, Iceland, Italy and the Netherlands. NPIs from seven groups were considered: psychosocial interventions, physical activity, regular care interventions, special therapies, preventive measures, special aids and environmental interventions. Results: A total of 2884 homecare recipients were included. The mean age at baseline was 82.9 years and of all participants, 66.9% were female. The intervention with the highest prevalence in the study sample was ‘emergency assistance available’ (74%). Two other highly prevalent interventions were ‘physical activity’ (69%) and ‘home nurse’ (62%). Large differences between countries in the use of NPIs were observed and included, for example, ‘going outside’ (range 7–82%), ‘home health aids’ (range 12–93%), and ‘physician visit’ (range 24–94%). Conclusions: The use of NPIs varied considerably between homecare users in different European countries. It is important to better understand the barriers and facilitators of use of these potentially beneficial interventions in order to design successful uptake strategies.
AB - Purpose: Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) play an important role in the management of older people receiving homecare. However, little is known about how often specific NPIs are being used and to what extent usage varies between countries. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of NPIs in older homecare recipients in six European countries. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of older homecare recipients (65+) using baseline data from the longitudinal cohort study ‘Identifying best practices for care-dependent elderly by Benchmarking Costs and outcomes of community care’ (IBenC). The analyzed NPIs are based on the interRAI Home Care instrument, a comprehensive geriatric assessment instrument. The prevalence of 24 NPIs was analyzed in Belgium, Germany, Finland, Iceland, Italy and the Netherlands. NPIs from seven groups were considered: psychosocial interventions, physical activity, regular care interventions, special therapies, preventive measures, special aids and environmental interventions. Results: A total of 2884 homecare recipients were included. The mean age at baseline was 82.9 years and of all participants, 66.9% were female. The intervention with the highest prevalence in the study sample was ‘emergency assistance available’ (74%). Two other highly prevalent interventions were ‘physical activity’ (69%) and ‘home nurse’ (62%). Large differences between countries in the use of NPIs were observed and included, for example, ‘going outside’ (range 7–82%), ‘home health aids’ (range 12–93%), and ‘physician visit’ (range 24–94%). Conclusions: The use of NPIs varied considerably between homecare users in different European countries. It is important to better understand the barriers and facilitators of use of these potentially beneficial interventions in order to design successful uptake strategies.
KW - Care for older persons
KW - Homecare
KW - Non-drug interventions
KW - Non-pharmacological interventions
KW - Older people
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173546156&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-023-00868-w
DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-023-00868-w
M3 - Article
C2 - 37792242
SN - 1878-7649
JO - European Geriatric Medicine
JF - European Geriatric Medicine
ER -