Evaluation of an implementation project: The exercise physiology in aged care program

Effectiveness of physical rehabilitation for physical functioning and quality of life in long-term care residents with dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of physical rehabilitation vs non-rehabilitation comparators for physical functioning and quality of life in long-term care (LTC) residents with dementia.

INTRODUCTION

LTC residents living with dementia often have impaired physical functioning and quality of life. Physical rehabilitation can improve physical functioning and quality of life for individuals living with dementia; however, many LTC residents with dementia do not receive physical rehabilitation and providers are unsure what interventions to employ. A synthesis of studies examining physical rehabilitation will help guide practice in the LTC sector where most residents live with dementia. Previous syntheses have focused on all residents in LTC, specific professions, interventions, or people with dementia in the community. Our review focused on LTC residents with dementia and used a broader definition of physical rehabilitation.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review included studies that evaluated physical rehabilitation in comparison with non-rehabilitation controls among LTC residents with any severity of dementia. We included experimental and quasi-experimental studies that measured the effect on activities of daily living, performance-based physical functioning, and self- or proxy-rated quality of life.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PubMed (National Library of Medicine), Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane CENTRAL database with no date or language limitations. Two independent reviewers assessed the studies against the inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers extracted data and conducted a methodological quality assessment using standardized checklists from JBI. Certainty of evidence was ascertained using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Where possible, studies were pooled in meta-analyses; otherwise, a narrative synthesis was presented.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included (n=3072 participants); 27 were randomized controlled trials and (RCTs) the remaining 6 were non-randomized trials. The overall risk of bias of the included studies was low to unclear. Many of the included studies focused on increasing activity or walking, while few were individually tailored or at an intensity appropriate to induce therapeutic effects on physical function. Physical function was measured via several outcome measures, limiting our ability to pool results. There was low-certainty evidence that physical rehabilitation improved activities of daily living assessed with multiple instruments (12 RCTs, 1348 participants, standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.78; 95% CI 0.27 to 1.30) and lower extremity function assessed with the Short Physical Performance Battery Score (3 RCTs, 258 participants, mean difference [MD] 3.01 points; 95% CI 1.37 to 4.66), compared with non-rehabilitation interventions. There was very low- to moderate-certainty evidence that physical rehabilitation demonstrated no change in the 30-Second Sit to Stand Test (2 RCTs, 293 participants, MD 0.79 repetitions; 95% CI -0.45 to 2.03), 6-Minute Walk Test (4 RCTs, 363 participants, MD 17.32 meters; 95% CI -29.41 to 64.05), Timed Walk Test (4 RCTs, 400 participants, MD 0.10 meters/seconds; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.22), Timed Up and Go Test (3 RCTs, 275 participants, MD -2.89 seconds; 95% CI -6.62 to 0.84), or quality of life (4 RCTs, 419 participants, SMD 0.20; 95% CI -0.08 to 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that physical rehabilitation may improve activities of daily living for LTC residents living with dementia, although the evidence is of low certainty. The effect of physical rehabilitation on specific functional tasks, such as gait speed and quality of life, are less clear. Future research should examine the effects of individualized, progressive interventions on outcome measures that reflect the capacity and preferences of LTC residents with more advanced dementia.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022308444.

Some gain for a small investment: An economic evaluation of an exercise program for people living in residential aged care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a 12-week Exercise Physiology (EP) program for people living in a residential aged care facility.

METHODS

A within-study pre- and postintervention design to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per quality-adjusted life years gained. A health service provider perspective was used.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine participants enrolled in a 12-week program. The program cost was A$514.30 per resident. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of A$64 000, the likelihood of being cost-effective of the program is approximately 60%, due to a small increase in participants' quality of life, as reported by care staff. The model showed great variance, depending on who rated the participants' quality of life outcomes.

CONCLUSION

It is uncertain that a 12-week EP program is cost-effective based on the evidence of the current trial. However, it appears that a low-cost program can produce small improvements for residents in care facilities.

A cross-sectional assessment of the relationship between sedative medication and anticholinergic medication use and the movement behaviour of older adults living in residential aged care

Objectives

Medications with anticholinergic or sedative effects are frequently used by older people but can increase risk of falls and adverse events; however, less is known about their effect on movement behaviour. Here we examine the cross-sectional association between medication use and movement behaviour in older adults living in residential aged care.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-eight older adults living in residential aged care in metropolitan Australia participated. Medication data were collected from participants’ medical charts and sedative load and anticholinergic burden were determined. Seven-day movement behaviour was objectively assessed by a wrist-worn triaxial accelerometer. Raw accelerations were converted to sleep, sedentary time, and time in light, moderate, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. To explore the relationship between medication and movement behaviour, Spearman’s Rho correlations were conducted, as the data were not normally distributed.

Results

Analyses indicated that while anticholinergic burden was not associated with movement behaviour, sedative load was negatively correlated with a number of variables, accounting for 14% variance in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and 17% in the bout length of MVPA (p < .02).

Conclusion

The findings of this study showed a negative association between sedative load, due to medicines, and an individual’s movement behaviour. The impact of this could be a reduction in the ability of this population to maintain or improve their functional mobility, which may overshadow any benefits of the medicine in some circumstances.