» Articles » PMID: 33492349

The Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Assistive Technology and Telecare for Independent Living in Dementia: a Randomised Controlled Trial

Abstract

Objectives: The use of assistive technology and telecare (ATT) has been promoted to manage risks associated with independent living in people with dementia but with little evidence for effectiveness.

Methods: Participants were randomly assigned to receive an ATT assessment followed by installation of all appropriate ATT devices or limited control of appropriate ATT. The primary outcomes were time to institutionalisation and cost-effectiveness. Key secondary outcomes were number of incidents involving risks to safety, burden and stress in family caregivers and quality of life.

Results: Participants were assigned to receive full ATT (248 participants) or the limited control (247 participants). After adjusting for baseline imbalance of activities of daily living score, HR for median pre-institutionalisation survival was 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; P = 0.20. There were no significant differences between arms in health and social care (mean -£909; 95% CI, -£5,336 to £3,345, P = 0.678) and societal costs (mean -£3,545; 95% CI, -£13,914 to £6,581, P = 0.499). ATT group members had reduced participant-rated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 104 weeks (mean - 0.105; 95% CI, -0.204 to -0.007, P = 0.037) but did not differ in QALYs derived from proxy-reported EQ-5D.

Discussion: Fidelity of the intervention was low in terms of matching ATT assessment, recommendations and installation. This, however, reflects current practice within adult social care in England.

Conclusions: Time living independently outside a care home was not significantly longer in participants who received full ATT and ATT was not cost-effective. Participants with full ATT attained fewer QALYs based on participant-reported EQ-5D than controls at 104 weeks.

Citing Articles

Enhancing ALS disease management: exploring integrated user value through online communities evidence.

Hruska J, Bachmann P, Odei S Front Neurol. 2025; 15:1393261.

PMID: 39906330 PMC: 11792661. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1393261.


Technology that CARES: Enhancing dementia care through everyday technologies.

Kiselica A, Hermann G, Scullin M, Benge J Alzheimers Dement. 2024; 20(12):8969-8978.

PMID: 39508340 PMC: 11667529. DOI: 10.1002/alz.14192.


Guideline summary: assessment, diagnosis, care and support for people with dementia and their carers [Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network SIGN Guideline 168].

Burton J, Soiza R, Quinn T Age Ageing. 2024; 53(7).

PMID: 38970550 PMC: 11227111. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afae147.


Effectiveness of the online-based comprehensive cognitive training application, Smart Brain, for community-dwelling older adults with dementia: a randomized controlled trial.

Chae H, Lee S Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024; 60(3):423-432.

PMID: 38647533 PMC: 11261305. DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.24.08043-2.


The Technology in Caring Questionnaire: Development and Psychometric Properties.

Kiselica A, Lin S, Ranum R, Mikula C, Hermann G, Boone A Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2024; 38(1):77-84.

PMID: 38277628 PMC: 10922679. DOI: 10.1097/WAD.0000000000000604.


References
1.
Gibson G, Newton L, Pritchard G, Finch T, Brittain K, Robinson L . The provision of assistive technology products and services for people with dementia in the United Kingdom. Dementia (London). 2014; 15(4):681-701. DOI: 10.1177/1471301214532643. View

2.
Walters S, Brazier J . Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res. 2005; 14(6):1523-32. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-004-7713-0. View

3.
. Global, regional, and national burden of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2018; 18(1):88-106. PMC: 6291454. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30403-4. View

4.
Basu A, Manning W . Estimating lifetime or episode-of-illness costs under censoring. Health Econ. 2010; 19(9):1010-28. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1640. View

5.
Jenkinson C, Stewart-Brown S, Petersen S, Paice C . Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999; 53(1):46-50. PMC: 1756775. DOI: 10.1136/jech.53.1.46. View