Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Background
This research aimed to assess the effectiveness of preventive home visits (PHVs) in enhancing resilience and health-related outcomes among older adults living in the community.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in nine databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Emcare, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library. The search was undertaken between March 15 and 31, 2022 with subsequent updates performed on October 15, 2023 and April 10, 2024. This review also included grey literature sourced via Google, Google Scholar and backward citation searches.
Results
Out of 5,621 records, 20 articles were found to meet the inclusion criteria with a total of 8,035 participants involved and the mean age ranged from 74.0 to 84.4 years. Using McMaster Critical Review Form for Quantitative Studies, we ascertained that the studies included in our analysis had moderate to high levels of quality. In addition to health-related outcomes, PHV interventions were also conducted to evaluate psychological effects (16 studies) and social outcomes (seven studies). Five studies conducted financial assessment to evaluate the costs of health and social care utilisation during PHV interventions. Regarding the results of the review, seven studies showed favourable outcomes, five indicated no effect and eight had equivocal findings. Only one study assessed resilience and determined that PHV had no effect on the resilience of the subjects.
Conclusion
This review found that the effectiveness of PHV interventions was uncertain and inconclusive. PHV interventions often prioritise health-related objectives. The incorporation of a holistic approach involving psychosocial health into PHV interventions is relatively uncommon. Due to the paucity of research on resilience as PHV outcome, we are unable to draw a conclusion on the effectiveness of PHV on resilience. Resilience should be prioritised as a psychological assessment in the future development of comprehensive PHV interventions, as it enables older adults to adapt, manage, and respond positively to adversities that may arise with age. Performing financial analysis such as costs and benefits analysis to incorporate the return on investment of PHV interventions is an added value for future research on this topic.
Clinical trial registration
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022296919.

**背景**
本研究旨在评估预防性家庭访视（Preventive Home Visits, PHVs）对社区居住老年人韧性及健康相关结局的改善效果。

**方法**
本研究于9个数据库（PubMed、MEDLINE、CINAHL、Embase、Emcare、Web of Science (WOS)、Scopus、PsycINFO及Cochrane图书馆）开展全面的文献检索，检索时间为2022年3月15日至31日，并分别于2023年10月15日、2024年4月10日进行了两次更新。本综述同时纳入通过谷歌、谷歌学术及反向引文检索获取的灰色文献。

**结果**
本次检索共获取5621条记录，最终有20篇文献符合纳入标准，纳入总受试者8035名，平均年龄范围为74.0~84.4岁。采用《麦克马斯特定量研究批判性评价表》（McMaster Critical Review Form for Quantitative Studies）进行质量评价，结果显示纳入分析的研究整体质量为中等至高等水平。除健康相关结局外，本综述还纳入了评估预防性家庭访视干预心理效应（16项研究）与社会结局（7项研究）的文献。另有5项研究开展了财务评估，以分析预防性家庭访视干预期间卫生与社会照护利用的相关成本。就本综述的结果而言，7项研究报告了有利结局，5项研究显示无显著效应，8项研究结果模棱两可。仅有1项研究对韧性进行了评估，结果表明预防性家庭访视对受试者的韧性无显著影响。

**结论**
本综述发现，预防性家庭访视干预的有效性尚不明确，尚无定论。此类干预通常优先关注健康相关目标，而将包含心理社会健康的整体照护方案纳入预防性家庭访视的实践相对少见。由于以韧性作为预防性家庭访视结局的研究较为匮乏，目前无法就其对老年人韧性的有效性得出确切结论。在未来开发综合性预防性家庭访视干预方案时，应优先将韧性纳入心理评估维度，因其可帮助老年人适应、应对并积极应对随年龄增长而来的各类逆境。开展成本效益分析等财务评估以明确预防性家庭访视干预的投资回报率，可为该主题的后续研究提供新增价值。

**临床试验注册**
本研究的PROSPERO注册编号为CRD42022296919。