Hopp til innhold

Selected items added to basket

Go to basket

Systematic review

Effect of day care centers for people with dementia

  • Year: 2014
  • By: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services
  • Authors Dahm KT, Hafstad E, Dalsbø TK.
  • ISBN (digital): 978-82-8121-863-5

Update of literature search from 2011. The main findings were: We included eight studies. There was inconsistency in the results and all conclusions were based on findings from studies with high risk of bias.



Have you found an error?

Order

Download:

Key message

Background

The Ministry of Health commissioned the National Knowledge Center for The Health Care Services to review the available evidence on the effects and costs related to special day care centers for people with dementia.  This work was published in 2011, report number 21 (1).

The main findings were: We included eight studies. There was inconsistency in the results and all conclusions were based on findings from studies with high risk of bias. The research documentation is of low or very low quality for all relevant outcomes. Hence, the results must be interpreted with great caution.  It is unclear if the use of special day care centers for people with dementia reduces or postpones admission to nursing homes or hospitals (two studies – low/very low quality). We cannot conclude with any certainty, but special day care might contribute to

  • reduced incidence of behavior problems (five studies – very low quality)
  • less burden for carers (three studies – very low quality)
  • less use of psychopharma (one study – very low quality) 

It does not seem that special day care has an effect on functioning for people with dementia. We cannot answer the question on cost-effectiveness.

The Directorate for Health asked  us to update the report. We have performed a  literature search to find potential new and relevant studies. We updated the previous systematic literature search. We searched several relevant medical databases. We searched in several relevant medical databases. The search was ran in March 2014. Thereafter, two persons independently read through all the titles and abstracts to find potential new trials that met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. We read 764 references from the electronic database search. None of them was relevant.