A study protocol of a randomised controlled trial to measure the effects of an augmented prescribed exercise programme (APEP) for frail older medical patients in the acute setting

Development and internal validation of a prediction model to identify older adults at risk of low physical activity levels during hospitalisation: a prospective cohort study

Background

Inactive behaviour is common in older adults during hospitalisation and associated with poor health outcomes. If patients at high risk of spending little time standing/walking could be identified early after admission, they could be given interventions aimed at increasing their time spent standing/walking. This study aims to identify older adults at high risk of low physical activity (PA) levels during hospitalisation.

Methods

Prospective cohort study of 165 older adults (≥ 70 years) admitted to the department of Internal Medicine of Maastricht University Medical Centre for acute medical illness. Two prediction models were developed to predict the probability of low PA levels during hospitalisation. Time spent standing/walking per day was measured with an accelerometer until discharge (≤ 12 days). The average time standing/walking per day between inclusion and discharge was dichotomized into low/high PA levels by dividing the cohort at the median (50.0%) in model 1, and lowest tertile (33.3%) in model 2. Potential predictors—Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC), age, sex, walking aid use, and disabilities in activities of daily living—were selected based on literature and analysed using logistic regression analysis. Models were internally validated using bootstrapping. Model performance was quantified using measures of discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)) and calibration (Hosmer and Lemeshow (H–L) goodness-of-fit test and calibration plots).

Results

Model 1 predicts a probability of spending ≤ 64.4 min standing/walking and holds the predictors SPPB, AM-PAC and sex. Model 2 predicts a probability of spending ≤ 47.2 min standing/walking and holds the predictors SPPB, AM-PAC, age and walking aid use. AUCs of models 1 and 2 were .80 (95% confidence interval (CI) = .73—.87) and .86 (95%CI = .79—.92), respectively, indicating good discriminative ability. Both models demonstrate near perfect calibration of the predicted probabilities and good overall performance, with model 2 performing slightly better.

Conclusions

The developed and internally validated prediction models may enable clinicians to identify older adults at high risk of low PA levels during hospitalisation. External validation and determining the clinical impact are needed before applying the models in clinical practise.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03146-9.

Augmented exercise in hospital improves physical performance and reduces negative post hospitalization events: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To measure the effects of an augmented prescribed exercise programme versus usual care, on physical performance, quality of life and healthcare utilisation for frail older medical patients in the acute setting.

METHODS

This was a parallel single-blinded randomised controlled trial. Within 2 days of admission, older medical inpatients with an anticipated length of stay ≥3 days, needing assistance/aid to walk, were blindly randomly allocated to the intervention or control group. Until discharge, both groups received twice daily, Monday-to-Friday half-hour assisted exercises, assisted by a staff physiotherapist. The intervention group completed tailored strengthening and balance exercises; the control group performed stretching and relaxation exercises. Length of stay was the primary outcome measure. Blindly assessed secondary measures included readmissions within 3 months, and physical performance (Short Physical Performance Battery) and quality of life (EuroQOL-5D-5 L) at discharge and at 3 months. Time-to-event analysis was used to measure differences in length of stay, and regression models were used to measure differences in physical performance, quality of life, adverse events (falls, deaths) and negative events (prolonged hospitalisation, institutionalisation).

RESULTS

Of the 199 patients allocated, 190 patients' (aged 80 ± 7.5 years) data were analysed. Groups were comparable at baseline. In intention-to-treat analysis, length of stay did not differ between groups (HR 1.09 (95% CI, 0.77-1.56) p = 0.6). Physical performance was better in the intervention group at discharge (difference 0.88 (95% CI, 0.20-1.57) p = 0.01), but lost at follow-up (difference 0.45 (95% CI, - 0.43 - 1.33) p = 0.3). An improvement in quality of life was detected at follow-up in the intervention group (difference 0.28 (95% CI, 0.9-0.47) p = 0.004). Overall, fewer negative events occurred in the intervention group (OR 0.46 (95% CI 0.23-0.92) p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Improvements in physical performance, quality of life and fewer negative events suggest that this intervention is of value to frail medical inpatients. Its effect on length of stay remains unclear.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02463864, registered prospectively 26.05.2015.

Evaluation of the geriatric curriculum implemented at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran, since 2017: A qualitative study

Background: Recently, there has been an increase in life expectancy due to improvements in nutrition, health, and sanitation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the geriatric curriculum in the field of general medicine at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Iran to improve the quality of services provided to this population in the community. Methods: This was a qualitative study­­. Six educational hospitals and ambulatory centers of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences participated in this study. Within these centers, 15 medical education faculty members and educational experts, 6 medical students, 6 elderly patients and 6 nurses working in the university related to the geriatric field were selected using purposive sampling. Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussion and field observations in the teaching hospital and ambulatory setting of SUMS from June 2017 to May 2018.  Based on the qualitative research, the data underwent conventional content analysis and the main themes were developed from this. Results: Three main themes were extracted from the data: effective clinical education, geriatrics curriculum challenges and promotion strategies for geriatric medicine. Subcategories that emerged were a competent curriculum teacher, a challenging program, management of resources, promotion of the program, and the revision required in the curriculum, which were related to other concepts and described in the real-world situation of the geriatric curriculum in the university, as observed in field observations. Conclusions: This study identified three concepts as main themes that can be used to explain how to implement a geriatric curriculum in a medical university. The main contributing factor to different views of the participants was identified as the revision required to the curriculum for integrative care in a geriatric patient. This should be taken into consideration while planning any programs and decisions aimed at education of medical students on this topic.

An augmented prescribed exercise program (APEP) to improve mobility of older acute medical patients - a randomized, controlled pilot and feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

There is inconclusive evidence for the effectiveness of additional exercise in older hospital patients. The aims of this study were (1) to assess the feasibility of an augmented prescribed exercise program (APEP) in older acute medical patients and (2) to measure the potential effects of APEP on mobility capacity in order to assess the feasibility of a large full-scale study.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, prospective, parallel-group, single-blinded, randomized (1:1) controlled pilot and feasibility trial. Participants were recruited from acute geriatric wards of a general hospital. Key inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 65 years and walking ability. Key exclusion criteria were severe cognitive impairment and medical restriction for physical exercise interventions. Both groups received usual care, including physiotherapy. Intervention group participants were scheduled for additional exercise sessions (20-30 min, 4-5x/week). Feasibility of the trial design was assessed along pre-defined criteria for process, resources and management. Feasibility of the APEP intervention was analyzed by means of adherence, compliance and safety. Outcomes were measured at baseline and prior to hospital discharge. The primary outcome was mobility capacity (de Morton Mobility Index; DEMMI). Secondary outcomes were walking ability, physical endurance, fear of falling, frailty and length of stay.

RESULTS

Thirty-five participants were recruited (recruitment rate 20.3%). We lost 7 participants to follow-up (retention rate: 80%). Intervention group participants (n = 17) each participated in 5.3 ± 2.2 additional exercise sessions (mean duration: 23.2 ± 4.0 min; mean adherence rate 78% ± 26%). No severe adverse events occurred during study assessments or APEP sessions. There were no statistically significant differences in mean change scores in any outcome measure. A sample of 124 participants would be required to detect a difference of 4 DEMMI points (ES = 0.45) with a power of 80%.

CONCLUSIONS

This small feasibility RCT indicates that an APEP intervention may be safe and feasible in older acute medical patients. APEP may possibly induce small to moderate effects on mobility, but the clinical relevance of these effects may be limited. These results inform the planning of a larger-scale phase III study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00011262 ). Registered 27 October 2016.

Interventions for preventing falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals

BACKGROUND

Falls in care facilities and hospitals are common events that cause considerable morbidity and mortality for older people. This is an update of a review first published in 2010 and updated in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions designed to reduce the incidence of falls in older people in care facilities and hospitals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (August 2017); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2017, Issue 8); and MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and trial registers to August 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of interventions for preventing falls in older people in residential or nursing care facilities, or hospitals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author screened abstracts; two review authors screened full-text articles for inclusion. Two review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction. We calculated rate ratios (RaR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for rate of falls and risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for outcomes such as risk of falling (number of people falling). We pooled results where appropriate. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five new trials (77,869 participants) were included in this update. Overall, we included 95 trials (138,164 participants), 71 (40,374 participants; mean age 84 years; 75% women) in care facilities and 24 (97,790 participants; mean age 78 years; 52% women) in hospitals. The majority of trials were at high risk of bias in one or more domains, mostly relating to lack of blinding. With few exceptions, the quality of evidence for individual interventions in either setting was generally rated as low or very low. Risk of fracture and adverse events were generally poorly reported and, where reported, the evidence was very low-quality, which means that we are uncertain of the estimates. Only the falls outcomes for the main comparisons are reported here.Care facilitiesSeventeen trials compared exercise with control (typically usual care alone). We are uncertain of the effect of exercise on rate of falls (RaR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.20; 2002 participants, 10 studies; I² = 76%; very low-quality evidence). Exercise may make little or no difference to the risk of falling (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; 2090 participants, 10 studies; I² = 23%; low-quality evidence).There is low-quality evidence that general medication review (tested in 12 trials) may make little or no difference to the rate of falls (RaR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.35; 2409 participants, 6 studies; I² = 93%) or the risk of falling (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09; 5139 participants, 6 studies; I² = 48%).There is moderate-quality evidence that vitamin D supplementation (4512 participants, 4 studies) probably reduces the rate of falls (RaR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.95; I² = 62%), but probably makes little or no difference to the risk of falling (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; I² = 42%). The population included in these studies had low vitamin D levels.Multifactorial interventions were tested in 13 trials. We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the rate of falls (RaR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.18; 3439 participants, 10 studies; I² = 84%; very low-quality evidence). They may make little or no difference to the risk of falling (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.05; 3153 participants, 9 studies; I² = 42%; low-quality evidence).HospitalsThree trials tested the effect of additional physiotherapy (supervised exercises) in rehabilitation wards (subacute setting). The very low-quality evidence means we are uncertain of the effect of additional physiotherapy on the rate of falls (RaR 0.59, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.34; 215 participants, 2 studies; I² = 0%), or whether it reduces the risk of falling (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.93; 83 participants, 2 studies; I² = 0%).We are uncertain of the effects of bed and chair sensor alarms in hospitals, tested in two trials (28,649 participants) on rate of falls (RaR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence) or risk of falling (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.24; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence).Multifactorial interventions in hospitals may reduce rate of falls in hospitals (RaR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.01; 44,664 participants, 5 studies; I² = 52%). A subgroup analysis by setting suggests the reduction may be more likely in a subacute setting (RaR 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83; 3747 participants, 2 studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the risk of falling (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.09; 39,889 participants; 3 studies; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In care facilities: we are uncertain of the effect of exercise on rate of falls and it may make little or no difference to the risk of falling. General medication review may make little or no difference to the rate of falls or risk of falling. Vitamin D supplementation probably reduces the rate of falls but not risk of falling. We are uncertain of the effect of multifactorial interventions on the rate of falls; they may make little or no difference to the risk of falling.In hospitals: we are uncertain of the effect of additional physiotherapy on the rate of falls or whether it reduces the risk of falling. We are uncertain of the effect of providing bed sensor alarms on the rate of falls or risk of falling. Multifactorial interventions may reduce rate of falls, although subgroup analysis suggests this may apply mostly to a subacute setting; we are uncertain of the effect of these interventions on risk of falling.