Models of Care and Interventions to Improve Person-Centred Care for Older People in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review.

The included studies differed widely in design, participants, interventions, and outcomes, so the review cannot identify which component produced the effects. Some studies reported no significant effects, so the direction of evidence is mixed. Quality was moderate overall, with problems including unclear randomisation, lack of double blinding, unclear criteria, and poor integration of mixed-method results. Only English and Thai peer-reviewed studies were included, so relevant evidence from other countries may be missing. Many outcomes were staff-reported or education-focused, not only direct resident care outcomes. No studies were removed for poor quality, which may include weaker evidence.

The paper says there was no specific funding, but also names University of Birmingham and Chiang Mai University as funders. The first author received an academic scholarship from the Faculty of Nursing, Chiang Mai University. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Do not conclude that person-centred care programmes reliably improve resident outcomes. The review included heterogeneous studies, some null results, staff-reported outcomes, and implementation barriers such as staffing shortages.