A randomized controlled feasibility trial of a home-based walking behavior-change intervention for people with intermittent claudication

Home-based Circuit Training and Community Walking for Intermittent Claudication

BACKGROUND

Supervised exercise training is recommended for people with peripheral artery disease (PAD), yet it remains underutilized. Home-based exercise programs (HBEPs) are a potential alternative. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full scale trial of a 12-week HBEP for people living with symptomatic PAD.

METHODS

In a randomized feasibility trial, patients with intermittent claudication were allocated to either an HBEP or a nonexercise control. The HBEP group was given a Fitbit to use during a 12-week exercise program comprising of personalized step goals and a resistance-based circuit to be undertaken at home twice weekly. The primary outcome was feasibility, assessed via eligibility, recruitment, attrition, tolerability, and adherence. Acceptability was assessed via semistructured interviews. Secondary analysis was undertaken to determine the feasibility of collecting clinical outcome data.

RESULTS

188 people were screened, 133 were eligible (70.7%), 30 were recruited (22.6%) and one withdrew (3.33%). Mean adherence to the daily step goal was 53.5% (range = 29.8-90.5%), and 58.6% of prescribed circuits were completed of which 56.4% were at the desired intensity. Six adverse events were recorded, 3 of which were related to study involvement. No significant differences were observed in exploratory outcomes. Small clinically important differences were seen in walking speed and pain-free treadmill walking distance which should be confirmed or refuted in a larger trial.

CONCLUSIONS

The HBEP was feasible and well tolerated, with successful recruitment and minimal attrition. The intervention was acceptable, with walking seen as more enjoyable than circuit exercise. The WALKSTRONG program may be suitable for those who will not, or cannot, take part in supervised exercise outside of the home.

Interventions to improve outdoor mobility among people living with disabilities: A systematic review

Background

Around 15% of the global population live with some form of disabilities and experience worse health outcomes, less participation in the community and are part of fewer activities outside the home. Outdoor mobility interventions aim to improve the ability to move, travel and orient outside the home and could influence the number of activities outside the home, participation and quality of life. However, outdoor mobility interventions may also lead to harm like falls or injuries or have unforeseen effects which could lead to mortality or hospitalization.

Objectives

To assess the efficacy of interventions aiming to improve outdoor mobility for adults living with disabilities and to explore if the efficacy varies between different conditions and different intervention components.

Search Methods

Standard, extensive Campbell search methods were used, including a total of 12 databases searched during January 2023, including trial registries.

Selection Criteria

Only randomized controlled trials were included, focusing on people living with disabilities, comparing interventions to improve outdoor mobility to control interventions as well as comparing different types of interventions to improve outdoor mobility.

Data Collection and Analysis

Standard methodological procedures expected by Campbell were used. The following important outcomes were 1. Activity outside the home; 2. Engagement in everyday life activities; 3. Participation; 4. Health-related Quality of Life; 5. Major harms; 6. Minor harms. The impact of the interventions was evaluated in the shorter (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) after starting the intervention. Results are presented using risk ratios (RR), risk difference (RD), and standardized mean differences (SMD), with the associated confidence intervals (CI). The risk of bias 2-tool and the GRADE-framework were used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

Main Results

The screening comprised of 12.894 studies and included 22 studies involving 2.675 people living with disabilities and identified 12 ongoing studies. All reported outcomes except one (reported in one study, some concerns of bias) had overall high risk of bias. Thirteen studies were conducted in participants with disabilities due to stroke, five studies with older adults living with disabilities, two studies with wheelchair users, one study in participants with disabilities after a hip fracture, and one study in participants with cognitive impairments. Skill training interventions versus control interventions (16 studies) The evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of skill training interventions versus control interventions not aimed to improve outdoor mobility among all people living with disabilities both in the shorter term (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) for Activity outside the home; Participation; Health-related Quality of Life; Major harms; and Minor harms, based on very low certainty evidence. Skill training interventions may improve engagement in everyday life activities among people with disabilities in the shorter term (RR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.84; I 2 = 7%; RD: 0.15; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.32; I 2 = 71%; 692 participants; three studies; low certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain in the longer term, based on very low certainty evidence. Subgroup analysis of skill training interventions among people living with disabilities due to cognitive impairments suggests that such interventions may improve activity outside the home in the shorter term (SMD: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.81; I 2 = NA; 118 participants; one study; low certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis of skill training interventions among people living with cognitive impairments suggests that such interventions may improve health-related quality of life in the shorter term (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.88; I 2 = NA; 118 participants; one study; low certainty evidence). Physical training interventions versus control interventions (five studies) The evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of physical training interventions versus control interventions not aimed to improve outdoor mobility in the shorter term (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) for: Engagement in everyday life activities; Participation; Health-related Quality of Life; Major harms; and Minor harms, based on very low certainty evidence. Physical training interventions may improve activity outside the home in the shorter (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.61; I 2 = NA; 228 participants; one study; low certainty evidence) and longer term (≥7 months) (SMD: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.54; I 2 = NA; 216 participants; one study; low certainty evidence). Comparison of different outdoor mobility interventions (one study) The evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of outdoor mobility interventions of different lengths in the shorter term (≤6 months) and longer term (≥7 months) for Activity outside the home; Engagement in everyday life activities; Participation; Health-related Quality of Life; Major harms; and Minor harms, based on very low certainty evidence. No studies explored the efficacy of other types of interventions.

Authors’ Conclusions

Twenty-two studies of interventions to improve outdoor mobility for people living with disabilities were identified, but the evidence still remains uncertain about most benefits and harms of these interventions, both in the short- and long term. This is primarily related to risk of bias, small underpowered studies and limited reporting of important outcomes for people living with disabilities. For people with disabilities, skill training interventions may improve engagement in everyday life in the short term, and improve activity outside the home and health-related quality of life for people with cognitive impairments in the short term. Still, this is based on low certainty evidence from few studies and should be interpreted with caution. One study with low certainty evidence suggests that physical training interventions may improve activity outside the home in the short term. In addition, the effect sizes across all outcomes were considered small or trivial, and could be of limited relevance to people living with disabilities. The evidence is currently uncertain if there are interventions that can improve outdoor mobility for people with disabilities, and can improve other important outcomes, while avoiding harms. To guide decisions about the use of interventions to improve outdoor mobility, future studies should use more rigorous design and report important outcomes for people with disabilities to reduce the current uncertainty.

Participants' experiences and acceptability of a home-based walking exercise behaviour-change intervention (MOtivating Structure walking Activity in people with Intermittent Claudication (MOSAIC))

OBJECTIVES

This study explored the experiences and acceptability of a novel, home-based, walking exercise behaviour-change intervention (MOtivating Structured walking Activity in people with Intermittent Claudication (MOSAIC)) in adults with Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD).

DESIGN AND SETTING

Individual semi-structured audio-recorded interviews were conducted with adults with Peripheral Arterial Disease who had completed the MOSAIC intervention as part of a randomised clinical trial. Data were analysed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis and interpreted using the seven-construct theoretical framework of acceptability of healthcare interventions (TFA).

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty participants (mean age (range) 67(54-80) years, 70% male, 55% White British) were interviewed.

RESULTS

One central theme was identified: Acceptability of walking exercise as a treatment. This theme was explained by four linked themes: Exploring walking exercise with a knowledgeable professional, Building confidence with each step, Towards self-management-learning strategies to continue walking and The impact of walking exercise. These themes were interpreted using six of the seven TFA constructs: affective attitude, burden, perceived effectiveness, intervention coherence, opportunity costs, and self-efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants perceived MOSAIC as an effective, acceptable, and low burden intervention. Physiotherapists were regarded as knowledgeable and supportive professionals who helped participants understand PAD and walking exercise as a treatment. Participants developed confidence to self-manage their condition and their symptoms. As participants confidence and walking capacity improved, they expanded their activities and gained a more positive outlook on their future. MOSAIC is an acceptable intervention that may facilitate adoption of and access to exercise for people with PAD.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Inequity in exercise-based interventions for adults with intermittent claudication due to peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To determine the equity in access to trials of exercise interventions for adults with intermittent claudication due to peripheral arterial disease.

METHODS

Systematic electronic database searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, PEDRO, Opengrey, ISRCTN and ClinincalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials of exercise interventions for adults with intermittent claudication were conducted. Data extraction was informed by Cochrane's PROGRESS-Plus framework.

RESULTS

Searches identified 6412 records. Following the screening of 262 full texts, 49 trials including 3695 participants were included. All trials excluded potential participants on at least one equity factor. This comprised place of residence, language, sex, personal characteristics (e.g., age and disability), features of relationships (e.g., familial risk factors) and time-dependent factors, (e.g., time since revascularisation). Overall, 1839 of 7567 potential participants (24.3%) were excluded based on equity factors. Disability was the most frequently reported factor for exclusions.

CONCLUSION

Trialists endeavour to enrol a representative sample in exercise trials whilst preserving the safety profile of the intervention. This review highlights that these efforts can inadvertently lead to inequities in access as all trials excluded potential participants on at least one equity factor. Future exercise trials should optimise participation to maximise generalisability of findings. PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020189965.Implications for rehabilitationEquity factors influence health opportunities and outcomes.All trials of exercise for people with intermittent claudication excluded adults on at least one equity factor.Disability was the predominant factor for exclusions from trials.Trials should optimise participation to maximise generalisability of results as these findings are used to inform treatment and service design.

Effect of a Home-Based, Walking Exercise Behavior Change Intervention vs Usual Care on Walking in Adults With Peripheral Artery Disease: The MOSAIC Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Home-based walking exercise interventions are recommended for people with peripheral artery disease (PAD), but evidence of their efficacy has been mixed.

Objective

To investigate the effect of a home-based, walking exercise behavior change intervention delivered by physical therapists in adults with PAD and intermittent claudication compared with usual care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Multicenter randomized clinical trial including 190 adults with PAD and intermittent claudication in 6 hospitals in the United Kingdom between January 2018 and March 2020; final follow-up was September 8, 2020.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to receive a walking exercise behavior change intervention delivered by physical therapists trained to use a motivational approach (n = 95) or usual care (n = 95).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was 6-minute walking distance at 3-month follow-up (minimal clinically important difference, 8-20 m). There were 8 secondary outcomes, 3 of which were the Walking Estimated Limitation Calculated by History (WELCH) questionnaire (score range, 0 [best performance] to 100), the Brief Illness Perceptions Questionnaire (score range, 0 to 80 [80 indicates negative perception of illness]), and the Theory of Planned Behavior Questionnaire (score range, 3 to 21 [21 indicates best attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, or intentions]); a minimal clinically important difference was not defined for these instruments.

Results

Among 190 randomized participants (mean age 68 years, 30% women, 79% White race, mean baseline 6-minute walking distance, 361.0 m), 148 (78%) completed 3-month follow-up. The 6-minute walking distance changed from 352.9 m at baseline to 380.6 m at 3 months in the intervention group and from 369.8 m to 372.1 m in the usual care group (adjusted mean between-group difference, 16.7 m [95% CI, 4.2 m to 29.2 m]; P = .009). Of the 8 secondary outcomes, 5 were not statistically significant. At 6-month follow-up, baseline WELCH scores changed from 18.0 to 27.8 in the intervention group and from 20.7 to 20.7 in the usual care group (adjusted mean between-group difference, 7.4 [95% CI, 2.5 to 12.3]; P = .003), scores on the Brief Illness Perceptions Questionnaire changed from 45.7 to 38.9 in the intervention group and from 44.0 to 45.8 in the usual care group (adjusted mean between-group difference, -6.6 [95% CI, -9.9 to -3.4]; P < .001), and scores on the attitude component of the Theory of Planned Behavior Questionnaire changed from 14.7 to 15.4 in the intervention group and from 14.6 to 13.9 in the usual care group (adjusted mean between-group difference, 1.4 [95% CI, 0.3 to 2.5]; P = .02). Thirteen serious adverse events occurred in the intervention group, compared with 3 in the usual care group. All were determined to be unrelated or unlikely to be related to the study.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among adults with PAD and intermittent claudication, a home-based, walking exercise behavior change intervention, compared with usual care, resulted in improved walking distance at 3 months. Further research is needed to determine the durability of these findings.

Trial Registrations

ISRCTN Identifier: 14501418; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03238222.

Pre-operative prognostic factors for walking capacity after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) reduces walking and quality of life. It is the main indication for spinal surgery in older people yet 40% report walking disability post-operatively. Identifying the prognostic factors of post-operative walking capacity could aid clinical decision-making, guide rehabilitation and optimise health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the evidence for pre-operative mutable and immutable prognostic factors for post-operative walking in adults with LSS.

DESIGN

Systematic review with narrative synthesis.

METHODS

Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey) were searched for observational studies, evaluating factors associated with walking after surgery in adults receiving surgery for LSS from database inception to January 2020. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias (Quality in Prognosis Studies). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method was used to determine level of evidence for each factor.

RESULTS

5526 studies were screened for eligibility. Thirty-four studies (20 cohorts, 9,973 participants, 26 high, 2 moderate, 6 low risk of bias) were included. Forty variables (12 mutable) were identified. There was moderate quality of evidence that pre-operative walking capacity was positively associated with post-operative walking capacity. The presence of spondylolisthesis and the severity of stenosis were not associated with post-operative walking capacity. All other factors investigated had low/very low level of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Greater pre-operative walking is associated with greater post-operative walking capacity but not spondylolisthesis or severity of stenosis. Few studies have investigated mutable prognostic factors that could be potentially targeted to optimise surgical outcomes.

Effects of home-based walking on cancer-related fatigue in patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to critically evaluate the effect of home-based walking on cancer-related fatigue (CRF) in patients with breast cancer receiving anti-cancer treatment.

DATA SOURCES

Eight databases were systematically searched from inception to March 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without language restrictions.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers scanned the titles and abstracts, and then read the full texts of potentially eligible trials to screen the literature. Inclusion criteria were studies of home-based walking (HBW) intervention in adult breast cancer patients, and used fatigue as a primary or secondary outcome and containing extractable fatigue scores.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers critically and independently assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane Collaboration criteria and extracted correlated data using the designed extraction form. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used when the outcome assessment tools were different. All of the analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eight RCTs, including 764 patients (HBW: 377, control: 387) meeting the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were identified. HBW had a significant effect on CRF in breast cancer (BC) patients receiving multiple anti-cancer treatments [SMD = -0.61, 95% CI (-0.86, -0.36), p<0.001]. HBW without other exercises [SMD = -0.83, 95% CI (-1.39, -0.27), p = 0.003], walking for a gradually increased duration [SMD = -1.24, 95% CI (-2.20, -0.28), p = 0.010] and no restrictions on walking intensity [SMD = -1.03, 95% CI (-1.75, -0.31), p = 0.005] demonstrated substantial effects on CRF. Of the eight included studies, only three reported adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

HBW can be considered as an alternative therapy for relieving CRF in breast cancer patients undergoing anti-cancer treatment.

An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Home-based Exercise Programmes for Individuals with Intermittent Claudication

OBJECTIVES

Supervised exercise programmes (SEP) are effective for improving walking distance in patients with intermittent claudication (IC) but provision and uptake rates are sub-optimal. Access to such programmes has also been halted by the Coronavirus pandemic. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence for home-based exercise programmes (HEP).

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for terms relating to HEP and IC.

REVIEW METHODS

This review was conducted in according with the published protocol and PRISMA guidance. Randomised and non-randomised trials that compared a HEP to SEP, basic exercise advice or no exercise controls for IC were included. A narrative synthesis was provided for all studies and meta-analyses conducted using data from randomised trials. The primary outcome was maximal walking distance. Sub-group analyses were performed to consider the effect of monitoring. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool and quality of evidence via GRADE.

RESULTS

23 studies with 1907 participants were included. Considering the narrative review, HEPs were inferior to SEPs which was reflected in the meta-analysis (MD 139m, 95% CI 45 to 232m, p = .004, very-low-quality evidence). Monitoring was an important component, as HEPs adopting this were equivalent to SEPs (MD: 8m, 95% CI -81 to 97, p = .86; moderate-quality evidence). For HEPs versus basic exercise advice, narrative review suggested HEPs can be superior, though not always significantly so. For HEPs versus no exercise controls, narrative review and meta-analysis suggested HEPs were potentially superior (MD: 136m, -2-273m p = .05, very-low-quality evidence). Monitoring was also a key element in these comparisons.Other elements such as appropriate frequency (≥3x a week), intensity (to moderate-maximum pain), duration (20 progressing to 60 minutes) and type (walking) of exercise were important, as was education, self-regulation, goal setting, feedback and action planning.

CONCLUSION

When SEPs are unavailable, HEPs are recommended. However, to elicit maximum benefit they should be structured, incorporating all elements of our evidence-based recommendations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018091248.

Satisfaction and Acceptability of Telemonitored Home-Based Exercise in Patients With Intermittent Claudication: Pragmatic Observational Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend supervised exercise training (SET) as a first-line treatment in patients with intermittent claudication (IC). SET has been shown to be more effective than home-based exercise therapy (HBET). However, the lack of available SET programs hampers broad SET implementation in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess patient satisfaction and acceptability of a structured HBET program using wearable technology and elastic band resistance exercises.

METHODS

A total of 20 patients with IC (Rutherford 1-3) with internet access and currently not engaged in structured exercise training were recruited in a pragmatic observational pilot study. Participants were instructed to complete 3 walking sessions and 2 elastic band resistance exercise sessions per week in their home environment during a 4-week period. Patient satisfaction and acceptability were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire (1-2=very unsatisfied, 3=neutral, and 4-5=very satisfied) evaluating the materials and intervention content. Secondary outcomes were evaluated at baseline and at completion of the 4-week intervention and included maximal walking distance (MWD) and pain-free walking distance (PFWD), physical fitness, and patient-reported outcomes on quality of life, walking capacity, levels of kinesiophobia, and self-efficacy. Statistically significant changes were tested using paired t tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.

RESULTS

All patients (15 men, 5 women; mean age 64.6, SD 10.6 years; range 41-81 years) completed the 4-week intervention and were highly satisfied with the program (mean overall score 4.5, SD 0.5). Patients' questionnaire responses documented willingness to recommend the exercise program to other patients (mean 4.5, SD 0.5; median 4.5) and preference for continuing the intervention (mean 4.3, SD 0.5; median 4). Furthermore, participants endorsed the use of the sports watches to track walking sessions (mean 4.25, SD 0.6; median 4), felt safe (mean 4.4, SD 0.6; median 4), and appreciated personal feedback (mean 4.55, SD 0.5; median 5) and flexibility of training (mean 4.1, SD 0.7; median 4). Resistance training was not preferred over walking training (mean 2.65, SD 0.8; median 3). In addition, PFWD (+89 m; P=.001), MWD (+58 m; P=.03), Walking Impairment Questionnaire distance score (+0.18; P=.01), activity-related scores (+0.54; P<.001), and total quality of life (+0.36; P=.009) improved following the intervention. Other patient-related outcomes, physical fitness, and physical activity remained to be statistically unaltered.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IC were satisfied and accepted technology to monitor and guide HBET, with observed short-term effectiveness regarding walking capacity and quality of life. However, elastic band resistance exercises as a part of HBET were not preferred over progressive walking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04043546; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04043546.

Motivating Structured walking Activity in people with Intermittent Claudication (MOSAIC): protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a physiotherapist-led, behavioural change intervention versus usual care in adults with intermittent claudication

INTRODUCTION

Walking exercise is a recommended but underused treatment for intermittent claudication caused by peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Addressing the factors that influence walking exercise may increase patient uptake of and adherence to recommended walking. The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to evaluate the efficacy of a physiotherapist-led behavioural change intervention on walking ability in adults with intermittent claudication (MOtivating Structured walking Activity in people with Intermittent Claudication (MOSAIC)) in comparison with usual care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The MOSAIC trial is a two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind RCT. 192 adults will be recruited from six National Health Service Hospital Trusts. Inclusion criteria are: aged ≥50 years, PAD (Ankle Brachial Pressure Index ≤0.90, radiographic evidence or clinician report) and intermittent claudication (San Diego Claudication Questionnaire), being able and willing to participate and provide informed consent. The primary outcome is walking ability (6 min walking distance) at 3 months. Outcomes will be obtained at baseline, 3 and 6 months by an assessor blind to group allocation. Participants will be individually randomised (n=96/group, stratified by centre) to receive either MOSAIC or usual care by an independent randomisation service. Estimates of treatment effects will use an intention-to-treat framework implemented using multiple regression adjusted for baseline values and centre.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial has full ethical approval (London-Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee (17/LO/0568)). It will be disseminated via patient forums, peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN14501418.