Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: We investigated the effectiveness of an Interdisciplinary Home-bAsed Reablement Programme (I-HARP) on improving functional independence, health and well-being of people with dementia, family carer outcomes and costs.
Method: A multicentre pragmatic parallel-arm randomised controlled trial compared I-HARP to usual care in community-dwelling people with mild to moderate dementia and their family carers in Sydney, Australia (2018-2022). I-HARP is a 4-month, home-based, dementia rehabilitation model delivered by an interdisciplinary team. Assessments were conducted at baseline (time-1), 4-month (time-2) and 12-month (time-3) follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the client's functional independence using the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD) scale at time-2, based on intention-to-treat analyses.
Result: Of 130 recruited client-carer dyads, 116 dyads (58/group) completed the trial. The I-HARP group were not significantly better in most outcome measures than usual care at both time-2 and time-3; with the only statistically significant difference being a reduction in home environment hazards at time-2. Post hoc subgroup analysis of 66 clients with mild dementia found significantly better functional independence in the intervention group compared with those in usual care: difference 8.99 on DAD (95% CI 1.21, 16.79) at time-2 and difference 12.16 (95% CI 1.93, 22.38) at time-3. Economic evaluation suggests potentially lower resource use in I-HARP compared with usual care, but the cost-effectiveness is uncertain.
Conclusion: Primary outcomes were not met for a population of people with dementia, with severity ranging from mild to moderate and severe. The I-HARP model appeared to benefit functional independence of participants with mild dementia, with potential cost savings.
Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12618000600246.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12322460 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2024-334514 | DOI Listing |