International Journal of Older People Nursing · Nov 7, 2026
Effects of Integrated Multicomponent Care on Older Adults With Frailty or Pre‐Frailty: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
By Huang K, Li S, Kong Q et al.
Background: Frailty and pre‐frailty are dynamic states of increased vulnerability that compromise functional independence in older adults. Although Integrated Multicomponent Care (IMC) is increasingly advocated to address multidimensional care needs, its effects on frailty‐related outcomes remain uncertain. Objectives: To evaluate the effects of IMC on frailty and related outcomes among older adults with frailty or pre‐frailty. Methods: We searched 10 databases up to September 10, 2024 and updated the search on June 12, 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐experimental studies were included. We calculated pooled intervention effects using risk ratios ( RR s) or standardized mean differences ( SMD s). We also performed sensitivity analyses, assessed publication bias, conducted subgroup analyses by frailty instrument, assessed risk of bias using RoB 2 and the JBI checklist and evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Results: This review included 20 studies. Six studies contributed to the frailty improvement meta‐analysis. The pooled estimate showed no statistically significant difference between IMC and control groups ( RR = 1.20, 95% CI: 0.97–1.49; Z = 1.68, p = 0.092; Q ₍₅₎ = 6.73, p = 0.241; I ² = 25.8%). Three studies contributed to the meta‐analysis of continuous activities of daily living (ADL) outcomes. The pooled estimate numerically favoured IMC, but the difference was not statistically significant ( SMD = 0.61, 95% CI: −0.11 to 1.34; Z = 1.66, p = 0.098), and heterogeneity was substantial ( I ² = 95.1%). No statistically significant differences were observed for health‐related quality of life (QoL) ( SMD = 0.00, 95% CI: −0.16–0.15), mortality ( RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.84–1.09) or rehospitalizations ( RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.79–1.26). Conclusion: Evidence that IMC improves frailty and ADL in older adults with frailty or pre‐frailty remains inconclusive. No statistically significant differences were observed between the IMC and control groups in health‐related QoL, mortality or rehospitalizations. Future high‐quality research with longer follow‐up is needed to further evaluate the effectiveness of IMC. Implications for Practice: The current evidence does not establish that IMC improves frailty, ADL or health‐related QoL or reduces mortality or rehospitalizations in older adults with frailty or pre‐frailty. These findings may inform the design and evaluation of frailty care pathways, but further high‐quality studies are needed to determine whether IMC produces clinically meaningful benefits. Trial Registration: PROSPERO (number CRD42024593133)