Graybill Erin M, McMeekin Peter, Wildman John
Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Business School, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 24;9(7):e102705. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102705. eCollection 2014.
To systematically review cost, cost-minimization and cost-effectiveness studies for assisted living technologies (ALTs) that specifically enable older people to 'age in place' and highlight what further research is needed to inform decisions regarding aging in place.
People aged 65+ and their live-in carers (where applicable), using an ALT to age in place at home opposed to a community-dwelling arrangement.
Studies were identified using a predefined search strategy on two key economic and cost evaluation databases NHS EED, HEED. Studies were assessed using methods recommended by the Campbell and Cochrane Economic Methods Group and presented in a narrative synthesis style.
Eight eligible studies were identified from North America spread over a diverse geographical range. The majority of studies reported the ALT intervention group as having lower resource use costs than the control group; though the low methodological quality and heterogeneity of the individual costs and outcomes reported across studies must be considered.
The studies suggest that in some cases ALTs may reduce costs, though little data were identified and what there were was of poor quality. Methods to capture quality of life gains were not used, therefore potential effects on health and wellbeing may be missed. Further research is required using newer developments such as the capabilities approach. High quality studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of ALTs for ageing in place are required before robust conclusion on their use can be drawn.
系统回顾辅助生活技术(ALT)的成本、成本最小化和成本效益研究,这些技术能使老年人实现“就地养老”,并强调还需要哪些进一步的研究来为就地养老的决策提供信息。
65岁及以上的老年人及其住家护理人员(如适用),使用ALT在家中就地养老,而非社区居住安排。
使用预定义的搜索策略在两个关键的经济和成本评估数据库NHS EED、HEED中识别研究。研究采用坎贝尔和考科蓝经济方法小组推荐的方法进行评估,并以叙述性综合的方式呈现。
从北美确定了八项符合条件的研究,分布在不同的地理区域。大多数研究报告称,ALT干预组的资源使用成本低于对照组;不过,必须考虑到各研究报告的个别成本和结果的方法学质量较低以及异质性。
研究表明,在某些情况下,ALT可能会降低成本,但几乎没有找到相关数据,且现有数据质量较差。未采用衡量生活质量提升的方法,因此可能会忽略对健康和幸福的潜在影响。需要利用诸如能力方法等新进展进行进一步研究。在就ALT用于就地养老得出可靠结论之前,需要高质量的研究来评估其成本效益。