The effect of Reablement, a multi-faceted intervention is unclear, specifically, which interventions improve outcomes. This Systematic Review evaluates randomised controlled trials (RCTs) describing Reablement investigating the population, interventions, who delivered them, the effect and sustainability of outcomes. Database search from inception to August 2021 included AMED, ASSIA, BNI, CINHALL, EMBASE, HMIC, MEDLINE, PUBMED, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov. Two researchers undertook data collection and quality assessment, following the PRISMA (2020) statement. They measured effect by changed primary or secondary outcomes: no ongoing service, functional ability, quality of life and mobility. The reviewers reported the analysis narratively, due to heterogeneity of outcome measures, strengthened by the SWiM reporting guideline. The search criteria resulted in eight international studies, five studies had a risk of bias limitations in either design or method. Ongoing service requirement decreased in five studies, with improved effect at 3 months shown in studies with occupational therapist involvement. Functional ability increased statistically in four studies at 3 months. Increase in quality of life was statistically significant in three studies, at 6 and 7 months. None of the studies reported a statistically significant improvement in functional mobility. Reablement is effective in the context of Health and Social Care. The outcomes were sustained at 3 months, with less sustainability at 6 months. There was no statistical result for the professional role regarding assessment, delivery and evaluation of interventions, and further research is justified.

中文翻译：

---

Reablement 或恢复性家庭护理干预和结果影响的调查：随机对照试验的系统评价

Reablement 是一种多方面的干预措施，其效果尚不清楚，具体而言，哪些干预措施可以改善结果。该系统评价评估了随机对照试验 (RCT)，这些试验描述了 Reablement 调查人群、干预措施、实施干预措施的人员、结果的效果和可持续性。从开始到 2021 年 8 月的数据库搜索包括 AMED、ASSIA、BNI、CINHALL、EMBASE、HMIC、MEDLINE、PUBMED、PsycINFO、Google Scholar、Web of Science、Clinicaltrials.gov。两位研究人员根据 PRISMA (2020) 声明进行了数据收集和质量评估。他们通过改变主要或次要结果来衡量效果：没有持续的服务、功能能力、生活质量和流动性。由于结果测量的异质性，审稿人以叙述方式报告了分析，由 SWiM 报告指南加强。搜索标准产生了八项国际研究，五项研究在设计或方法上存在偏倚限制的风险。五项研究减少了持续服务需求，在有职业治疗师参与的研究中显示 3 个月时效果有所改善。在 3 个月时，四项研究中的功能能力在统计学上有所提高。在 6 个月和 7 个月的三项研究中，生活质量的提高具有统计学意义。没有一项研究报告功能流动性有统计学意义的改善。Reablement 在健康和社会关怀方面是有效的。结果在 3 个月时持续，在 6 个月时可持续性较差。没有关于评估、实施和评估干预措施的专业角色的统计结果，