Evidence mapPaperPMID 36934341Full record

Trial reportAge and ageing2023

Cluster randomised trial of a complex interprofessional intervention (interprof ACT) to reduce hospital admission of nursing home residents.

Ana Mazur, Britta Tetzlaff, Tina Mallon, Berit Hesjedal-Streller, Vivien Wei, Martin Scherer, Sascha Köpke, Katrin Balzer, Linda Steyer, Tim Friede and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Age and ageing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. [Health status of older people in long-term inpatient care-a narrative review].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ana MazurDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.
Britta TetzlaffDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg D-20246, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5532-1424
Tina MallonDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg D-20246, Germany.
Berit Hesjedal-StrellerDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.
Vivien WeiDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.
Martin SchererDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg D-20246, Germany.
Sascha KöpkeInstitute of Nursing Science, University of Cologne and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne D-50935, Germany.
Katrin BalzerInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Nursing Research Unit, University of Lübeck, Lübeck D-23538, Germany.
Linda SteyerInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Nursing Research Unit, University of Lübeck, Lübeck D-23538, Germany.
Tim FriedeDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5347-7441
Sebastian PfeifferDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.
Eva HummersDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.
Christiane MüllerDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen D-37073, Germany.
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Lübeck · DEUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome hospital admissions of nursing home residents (NHRs) might be attributed to inadequate interprofessional collaboration. To improve general practitioner-nurse collaboration in nursing homes (NHs), we developed an intervention package (interprof ACT) in a previous study.

objectiveTo assess the impact of interprof ACT on the proportion of hospitalisation and other clinical parameters within 12 months from randomisation among NHRs.

methodsMulticentre, cluster randomised controlled trial in 34 German NHs. NHRs of the control group received usual care, whereas NHRs in the intervention group received interprof ACT. Eligible NHs had at least 40 long-term care residents. NHs were randomised 1:1 pairwise. Blinded assessors collected primary outcome data.

resultsSeventeen NHs (320 NHRs) were assigned to interprof ACT and 17 NHs (323 NHRs) to usual care. In the intervention group, 136 (42.5%) NHRs were hospitalised at least once within 12 months from randomisation and 151 (46.7%) in the control group (odds ratio (OR): 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.55; 1.22], P = 0.33). No differences were found for the average number of hospitalisations: 0.8 hospitalisations per NHR (rate ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% CI: [0.66, 1.25], P = 0.54). Average length of stay was 5.7 days for NHRs in the intervention group and 6.5 days in the control group (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: [0.45, 1.11], P = 0.13). Falls were the most common adverse event, but none was related to the study intervention.

conclusionsThe implementation of interprof ACT did not show a statistically significant and clinically relevant effect on hospital admission of NHRs.

Indexed as

HospitalizationNursing HomesHospitalsHumansLong-Term CareQuality of Lifecluster randomised controlled trialinterprofessional relationsnursing homesolder peoplepatient-centred carephysician–nurse relations

Identifiers

PMID36934341
PMCPMC10024891
OpenAlexW4327842289

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.