RSM logo
Journal of Health Services Research & Policy

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J Health Serv Res Policy 2006;11:110-119D
doi:10.1258/135581906776318947
© 2006 Royal Society of Medicine Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parker, G.
Right arrow Articles by Turner, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Review article

Paediatric home care: a systematic review of randomized trials on costs and effectiveness

Gillian Parker, Padma Bhakta, Caroline Lovett, Richard Olsen, Suzy Paisley, David Turner


Nuffield Community Care Studies Unit, Department of Health Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; Nuffield Community Care Studies Unit, Department of Health Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; Nuffield Community Care Studies Unit, Department of Health Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; Nuffield Community Care Studies Unit, Department of Health Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; Nuffield Community Care Studies Unit, Department of Health Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

Objective: To review systematically randomized trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness and costs of paediatric home care.

Methods: National Health Service (NHS) Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines were followed. In all, 20 electronic and other sources were searched, using specially designed strategies. Economic studies and other selected designs were included, but only RCT findings – on service use, clinical outcomes, costs, and impact on the family – are reported here. Analysis is descriptive, with pooled standard mean differences used where meta-analysis was possible.

Results: About 1730 identified records up to August 2001 were potentially relevant. In all, 10 RCTs (24 papers) were finally included, covering five types of paediatric home care – for very low birth weight or medically 'fragile' infants, for asthma or diabetes, for technology-dependent children, for mental health, and generic home care. Paediatric home care may enhance physical and mental development for very low birth weight infants and may be cheaper but the evidence is not strong. Home care for diabetes or asthma may reduce parents' costs with some clinical but no social differences noticeable. No randomized trials for technologically dependent children were found. Home care for mental health may increase parental satisfaction with services and reduce some health service and residential care costs. Generic home care showed no clinical effects at early follow-up. Partial follow-up after five years suggested improved psychological adjustment. No cost data were available for this care model.

Conclusions: Despite recent expansion, research evidence from randomized trials for paediatric home care is slight, and methods used are weak in places. Paediatric home care poses practical and ethical questions that cannot be addressed by RCTs.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




History of the London Clinic