Dementia care costs and outcomes: a systematic review

Objective We reviewed evidence on the cost‐effectiveness of prevention, care and treatment strategies in relation to dementia. Methods We performed a systematic review of available literature on economic evaluations of dementia care, searching key databases and websites in medicine, social care and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of geriatric psychiatry 2013-06, Vol.28 (6), p.551-561
Hauptverfasser: Knapp, Martin, Iemmi, Valentina, Romeo, Renee
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective We reviewed evidence on the cost‐effectiveness of prevention, care and treatment strategies in relation to dementia. Methods We performed a systematic review of available literature on economic evaluations of dementia care, searching key databases and websites in medicine, social care and economics. Literature reviews were privileged, and other study designs were included only to fill gaps in the evidence base. Narrative analysis was used to synthesise the results. Results We identified 56 literature reviews and 29 single studies offering economic evidence on dementia care. There is more cost‐effectiveness evidence on pharmacological therapies than other interventions. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors for mild‐to‐moderate disease and memantine for moderate‐to‐severe disease were found to be cost‐effective. Regarding non‐pharmacological treatments, cognitive stimulation therapy, tailored activity programme and occupational therapy were found to be more cost‐effective than usual care. There was some evidence to suggest that respite care in day settings and psychosocial interventions for carers could be cost‐effective. Coordinated care management and personal budgets held by carers have also demonstrated cost‐effectiveness in some studies. Conclusion Five barriers to achieving better value for money in dementia care were identified: the scarcity and low methodological quality of available studies, the difficulty of generalising from available evidence, the narrowness of cost measures, a reluctance to implement evidence and the poor coordination of health and social care provision and financing. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
ISSN:0885-6230
1099-1166
DOI:10.1002/gps.3864