The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry · 2013
Systematic review of the effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions to improve quality of life and well-being in people with dementia.
СтатьяМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cooper Claudia, Mukadam Naaheed, Katona Cornelius, Lyketsos Constantine G, Blazer Dan, Ames David, Rabins Peter, Brodaty Henry, de Mendonça Lima Carlos, Livingston Gill
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To review systematically, for the first time, the effectiveness of all pharmacologic interventions to improve quality of life and well-being in people with dementia.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed the 15 randomized controlled trials and one review that fitted predetermined criteria. We included studies that reported the outcomes quality of life, well-being, happiness, or pleasure.
MEASUREMENTS: We rated the validity of studies using a checklist. We calculated mean differences between intervention and control groups at follow-up.
RESULTS: None of the evaluated trials reported a significant benefit to quality of life or well-being for people with dementia when comparing those taking a drug or its comparator at follow-up (pooled weighted mean difference: 0.18 [95% confidence interval: -0.82 to 0.46]).
CONCLUSION: We found no consistent evidence that any drug improves quality of life in people with dementia. We recommend that all dementia trials should include quality of life as an outcome, as this is important to patients, and cannot be presumed from improvements in cognition or other symptomatic outcomes, especially if the latter are small.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed the 15 randomized controlled trials and one review that fitted predetermined criteria. We included studies that reported the outcomes quality of life, well-being, happiness, or pleasure.
MEASUREMENTS: We rated the validity of studies using a checklist. We calculated mean differences between intervention and control groups at follow-up.
RESULTS: None of the evaluated trials reported a significant benefit to quality of life or well-being for people with dementia when comparing those taking a drug or its comparator at follow-up (pooled weighted mean difference: 0.18 [95% confidence interval: -0.82 to 0.46]).
CONCLUSION: We found no consistent evidence that any drug improves quality of life in people with dementia. We recommend that all dementia trials should include quality of life as an outcome, as this is important to patients, and cannot be presumed from improvements in cognition or other symptomatic outcomes, especially if the latter are small.