Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Progressive resistance training can successfully target functional decline in healthy older community-dwelling adults. There are concerns about the safety and acceptance of its use in frail older populations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using progressive resistance training in an older, post-acute, inpatient setting.Methods
A randomised controlled feasibility study was conducted. Appropriate older inpatients undergoing post-acute rehabilitation were recruited. Feasibility measures examined were safety, recruitment, outcome measurement, adherence and retention rates and satisfaction. A range of clinical measures were used to capture changes in body structure and function, activity and participation. Assessments were performed on admission to the study and six weeks later.Results
A sample of 33 patients were included and randomised to the treatment group (n=16) or the control group (n=17). There were no serious adverse events, adherence rates were 63% and retention rates were 82%. While both groups improved between time 1 and 2, there were no significant differences in clinical measures between the groups.Conclusion
Progressive resistance training is a safe and acceptable intervention for use with this population. Further work on the effectiveness of progressive resistance training in this setting is now required.
SUBMITTER: Coleman SA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8017350 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background. In older patients, hospitalization is associated with a decline in functional performance and loss of muscle strength. Loss of muscle strength and functional performance can be prevented by systematic strength training, but details are lacking regarding the optimal exercise program and dose for older patients. Therefore, our aim was to test the feasibility of a progression model for loaded sit-to-stand training among older hospitalized patients. Methods. This is a prospective cohort study conducted as a feasibility study prior to a full-scale trial. We included twenty-four older patients (?65 yrs) acutely admitted from their own home to the medical services of the hospital. We developed an 8-level progression model for loaded sit-to-stands, which we named STAND. We used STAND as a model to describe how to perform the sit-to-stand exercise as a strength training exercise aimed at reaching a relative load of 8-12 repetitions maximum (RM) for 8-12 repetitions. Weight could be added by the use of a weight vest when needed. The ability of the patients to reach the intended relative load (8-12 RM), while performing sit-to-stands following the STAND model, was tested once during hospitalization and once following discharge in their own homes. A structured interview including assessment of possible modifiers (cognitive status by the Short Orientation Memory test and mobility by the De Morton Mobility Index) was administered both on admission to the hospital and in the home setting. The STAND model was considered feasible if: (1) 75% of the assessed patients could perform the exercise at a given level of the model reaching 8-12 repetitions at a relative load of 8-12 RM for one set of exercise in the hospital and two sets of exercise at home; (2) no ceiling or floor effect was seen; (3) no indication of adverse events were observed. The outcomes assessed were: level of STAND attained, the number of sets performed, perceived exertion (the Borg scale), and pain (the Verbal Ranking Scale). Results. Twenty-four patients consented to participate. Twenty-three of the patients were tested in the hospital and 19 patients were also tested in their home. All three criteria for feasibility were met: (1) in the hospital, 83% could perform the exercise at a given level of STAND, reaching 8-12 repetitions at 8-12 RM for one set, and 79% could do so for two sets in the home setting; (2) for all assessed patients, a possibility of progression or regression was possible-no ceiling or floor effect was observed; (3) no indication of adverse events (pain) was observed. Also, those that scored higher on the De Morton Mobility Index performed the exercise at higher levels of STAND, whereas performance was independent of cognitive status. Conclusions. We found a simple progression model for loaded sit-to-stands (STAND) feasible in acutely admitted older medical patients (?65 yrs), based on our pre-specified criteria for feasibility.
| S-EPMC4690357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis trial aimed to determine the feasibility of recruitment, retention, adherence, and safety of a resistance training (RT) intervention to skeletal muscle failure in both frail and non-frail older adults.DesignAn 8-week randomised feasibility trial.Setting and participantsOlder adults, with and without frailty, recruited from both clinics and community.MethodsRecruitment was based on the number of participants enrolled from those provided with a Patient Information Sheet (PIS). Retention was based on the number of participants who completed the trial. Adherence was based on the number of RT sessions attended out of 16. Outcomes included frailty (Fried criteria), muscle strength (maximal voluntary contraction), functional abilities (Short Physical Performance battery), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), activities of daily living (LIADL) and safety (diary).ResultsRecruitment target (n = 60) was achieved within 15 months, 58 were randomised to high (n = 30) or low repetition-load (n = 28) groups. Mean age of participants was 72 years (range 65-93). Adherence and retention rate for the RT intervention was ≥70%. There was one serious adverse experience due to the RT intervention. There were no differences (P > 0.05) in effects of RT on outcome variables between low and high repetition-load groups.Conclusions and implicationsRecruitment of frail people was challenging. Older adults performing supervised RT to skeletal muscle failure was feasible and safe, with appropriate caution, and the repetition-load did not appear to influence its efficacy. Future research into the effectiveness of this simplified model of RT is warranted.
| S-EPMC8434423 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients on acute psychiatric wards desire more psychosocial treatment than they receive, according to recent studies, but evidence-based interventions tailored to this setting are currently lacking. Metacognitive Training for psychosis (MCT) is a flexible, easy-to-administer group therapy that has been adapted to meet this demand (MCT-Acute). Thirty-seven patients with severe mental illness took part in MCT-Acute twice a week during their stay on a locked acute ward and were interviewed before, during, and after the intervention period regarding subjective utility, subjective adverse events, and symptom severity; attendance rates and reasons for absence were recorded. In addition, staff rated adverse events, symptom severity, and functioning (German Clinical Trial Register ID: DRKS00020551). Overall, most patients evaluated MCT-Acute positively and reported symptom stabilization. Staff also reported improvement in functioning. No clinician-rated adverse events related to participation in MCT-Acute were reported. Conducting MCT-Acute is feasible and safe and may contribute to meeting patients', practitioners', and researchers' demands for more evidence-based psychotherapeutic interventions for the acute psychiatric care setting.Clinical trial registrationID: DRKS00020551, https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00020551.
| S-EPMC10718302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRehabilitation potential involves predicting who will benefit from rehabilitation. Decisions about rehabilitation potential must take into account personal, clinical and contextual factors, a process which is complicated in the presence of acute ill-health and frailty. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the Rehabilitation Potential Assessment Tool (RePAT) - a 15 item holistic, person-centred assessment tool and training package - in the acute hospital setting.MethodsA non-randomised feasibility study with nested semi-structured interviews explored whether RePAT was feasible and acceptable. Feasibility was tested by recruiting physiotherapy and occupational therapy participants delivering the RePAT intervention to patients alongside usual clinical care. Acceptability was tested by conducting semi-structured interviews with staff, patient and carer participants. Staff and patient characteristics were analysed using descriptive statistics. Interview data were analysed thematically. Fidelity of completed RePAT items was assessed against a priori criteria on how closely they matched tool guidance by two researchers. Mean values of the two scores were calculated. RePAT content was analysed and supported with verbatim quotes.ResultsSix staff participants were recruited and trained. They assessed 26 patient participants using RePAT. Mean (SD) patient age was 86.16 (±6.39) years. 32% were vulnerable or mildly frail, 42% moderately frail and 26% severely or very severely frail using the Clinical Frailty Scale. Mean (SD) time to complete RePAT was 32.7 (±9.6) minutes. RePAT fidelity was good where 13 out of 15 items achieved a priori fidelity. RePAT was acceptable and tolerated by staff and patients. Staff participants reported RePAT enabled them to consider rehabilitation decisions in a more structured and consistent way. Patients and carer participants, although unable to comment directly on RePAT, reported being satisfied with their rehabilitation assessments which were found to embrace a person-centred approach.ConclusionsRePAT was found to be acceptable and feasible by staff, carers and patients. It allowed clinicians to make explicit their reasoning behind rehabilitation assessments and encouraged them to become more cognisant of factors which affected their clinical decision-making.Trial registrationID ISRCTN31938453 . Registered 05/10/2021.
| S-EPMC9541000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePatients with a hip fracture lose more than 50% knee-extension strength in the fractured limb within one week of surgery. Hence, immediate progressive strength training following hip fracture surgery may be rational, but the feasibility unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the feasibility of in-hospital progressive strength training implemented in the acute ward following hip fracture surgery, based on pre-specified criteria for feasibility.Design, setting and patientsA prospective cohort study conducted in an acute orthopedic hip fracture unit at a university hospital. A consecutive sample of 36 patients, 18 with a cervical and 18 with a trochanteric hip fracture (27 women and 9 men, mean (SD) age of 79.4 (8.3) years) were included between June and December 2012.InterventionA daily (on weekdays) program of progressive knee-extension strength training for the fractured limb, using ankle weight cuffs in 3 sets of 10 repetition maximum loadings.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the change in training load (kg) during the knee-extension strength training. The secondary outcomes were changes in hip fracture-related pain and maximal isometric knee-extension strength.ResultsThe strength training was commenced at a mean of 2.4 (0.7) days after surgery. The training loads (kilograms lifted) increased from 1.6 (0.8) to 4.3 (1.7) kg over 4.3 (2.2) training sessions (P<.001). The maximal isometric knee-extension strength of the fractured limb increased from 0.37 (0.2) to 0.61 (0.3) Nm/kg (P<.001), while the average strength deficit in the fractured limb decreased from 50% to 32% (% non-fractured, P<.001). Only 3 of 212 sessions were not performed because of severe hip fracture-related pain.Conclusion and relevanceProgressive knee-extension strength training of the fractured limb commenced in the acute ward seems feasible, and may reduce strength asymmetry between limbs without hip pain interfering. The clinical efficacy needs confirmation in a randomized controlled design.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01616030.
| S-EPMC3974729 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveRadical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard surgical treatment for early stage cervical cancer. One of the most common complications after this surgery is lower extremity lymphedema (LLL). Program of progressive resistance exercise training (PRET) is a possible way to prevent LLL for cervical cancer patients postoperatively. Before we start a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the preventive effect of PRET, we conducted this pilot study to assess the feasibility of PRET after cervical cancer surgery.MethodsThe primary purpose of the pilot study was the feasibility of PRET, as well as the satisfaction and adherence to the PRET assessed by a questionnaire. We conducted a single-arm prospective study involving cervical cancer patients who underwent radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy. Participants exercised twice a day for 24 weeks (two weeks of supervised in hospital and then 22 weeks of home-based training) after surgical treatment. All patients were followed up for 12 months. Information that included the limb volume, BMI, perceived difficulty level and adherence rate was collected.ResultsFrom February to April 2019, a total of 24 patients participated in the study. None of them dropped out. The adherence rate was more than 75% in majority of the patients, the perceived difficulty level of the PRET was high (for the first phase, the fourth phase and the fifth phase, more than half of the participants felt the intensity of the exercise appropriate), and no serious adverse events in the study were observed.ConclusionsExercise training was safe and feasible. The preliminary results offered us the possibility to further test the preventive effect of PRET in a full-scale randomized controlled trial.
| S-EPMC9072185 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Inpatient psychiatric care is a scarce and expensive resource in the National Health Service (NHS), with chronic bed shortages being partly driven by high re-admission rates. Brief inpatient talking therapies for psychosis could help reduce re-admission rates. The primary aim was to assess feasibility and acceptability of a novel, brief, mindfulness-based intervention for inpatients with psychosis. The secondary aim was to collect pilot outcome data on readmission rate, at 6 and 12?months (m) post discharge, and self-report symptom measures at 6?m. METHODS:The amBITION study (BrIef Talking therapIes ON wards) was a parallel group, feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT). In addition to treatment as usual (TAU), eligible inpatients with psychotic symptoms were randomly allocated to receive either (Mindfulness-Based Crisis Intervention; MBCI) or a control intervention (Social Activity Therapy; SAT), for 1-5 sessions. RESULTS:Fifty participants were recruited (26 MBCI; 24 SAT); all received at least 1 therapy session (mean?=?3). Follow-up rates were 98% at 6?m and 96% at 12?m for service use data extracted from clinical notes, and 86% for self-report measures. At 6?m follow-up, re-admission rates were similar across groups (MBCI?=?6, SAT?=?5; odds ratio?=?1.20, 95% CI: 0.312-4.61). At 12?m follow-up, re-admissions were lower in the MBCI group (MBCI?=?7, SAT?=?11; odds ratio?=?0.46, 95% CI: 0.14-1.51). Three participants experienced adverse events; none was related to trial participation. CONCLUSIONS:Delivering a brief mindfulness-based inpatient intervention for psychosis is feasible and acceptable, and may reduce risk of short-term readmission. These promising findings warrant progression to a larger clinical effectiveness trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN37625384.
| S-EPMC7191699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the feasibility of designing and conducting a definitive trial to evaluate the effectiveness of sacral fracture fixation compared with non-surgical management among older people admitted with a lateral compression pelvic fragility fracture (PFF).DesignSingle-site, parallel, two-arm randomised controlled feasibility trial.SettingA UK tertiary centre hospital.ParticipantsPatients aged ≥70 years who were ambulating pre-injury requiring hospital admission (within 28 days of injury) with a type 1 lateral compression PFF.InterventionsThe intervention group received sacral fracture fixation (cement augmentation±screw fixation) within 7 days of randomisation. Routine preoperative and postoperative care followed each surgical intervention. The control group received usual care consisting of analgesia, and regular input from the medical and therapy team.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe feasibility outcomes were the number of eligible patients, willingness to be randomised, adherence to allocated treatment, retention, data on the completeness and variability of the proposed definitive trial outcome measures, and reported adverse events.Results241 patients were screened. 13 (5.4%) were deemed eligible to participate. Among the eligible participants, nine (69.2%) were willing to participate. Five participants were randomised to the intervention group and four to the control group. The clinicians involved were willing to allow their patients to be randomised and adhere to the allocated treatment. One participant in the intervention group and two participants in the control group received their allocated treatment. All participants were followed up until 12 weeks post-randomisation, and had an additional safety follow-up assessment at 12 months. Overall, the proportion of completeness of outcome measures was at least 75%. No adverse events were directly related to the trial.ConclusionsThere were significant challenges in recruiting sufficient participants which will need to be addressed prior to a definitive trial.Trial registration numberISRCTN16719542.
| S-EPMC9066477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPreliminary evidence suggests that progressive resistance training may be beneficial for people with Prader-Willi Syndrome (PWS), a rare genetic condition that results in muscle weakness and low muscle tone.To establish whether community-based progressive resistance training is effective in improving the muscle strength of people with PWS; to determine cost-effectiveness; and, to complete a process evaluation assessing intervention fidelity, exploring mechanisms of impact, understanding participant experiences and identifying contextual factors affecting implementation.Methods and analysisA multisite, randomised controlled trial will be completed. Sixty participants with PWS will be randomised to receive either progressive resistance training (experimental) or non-progressive exercise (placebo control). Participants will be aged 13 to 60 years, be able to follow simple instructions in English and have no contraindications to performing progressive resistance training. The experimental group will complete progressive resistance training two times weekly for 24 weeks supervised by an exercise professional at a community gym. The control group will receive all aspects of the intervention except progressive overload. Outcomes will be assessed at week 25 (primary endpoint) and week 52 by a blinded assessor. The primary outcome is muscle strength assessed using one repetition maximum for upper limb and lower limb. Secondary outcomes are muscle mass, functional strength, physical activity, community participation, health-related quality of life and behaviour. Health economic analysis will evaluate cost-effectiveness. Process evaluation will assess safety and intervention fidelity, investigate mechanism of impact, explore participant experiences and identify contextual factors affecting implementation. Data collection commenced in February 2020 and will conclude in September 2023.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from The Royal Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/50874/RCHM-2019) under the National Mutual Acceptance initiative. Research governance approvals were obtained from five clinical sites. Results will be disseminated through published manuscripts, conference presentations, public seminars and practical resources for stakeholder groups.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000416998; Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry.
| S-EPMC9791392 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPeriacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is an established treatment for adolescent and adult patients with hip dysplasia. However, the efficacy of PAO has not been tested against another surgical intervention or conservative treatment in a randomised controlled trial before. We suggest that progressive resistance training (PRT) could be an alternative to PAO. The primary aim of this trial is therefore to examine the efficacy of PAO followed by 4 months of usual care followed by 8 months of PRT compared to 12 months of solely PRT in patients with hip dysplasia eligible for PAO in terms of patient-reported pain measured by The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS).Methods and analysisThis trial is a single-blinded multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial, where patients with hip dysplasia, who are eligible for PAO, will be randomised to either PAO followed by usual care and PRT or PRT only. Primary outcome is patient-reported pain, measured on the subscale pain on the HAGOS questionnaire 12 months after initiation of PAO or PRT. The key secondary outcomes are the other subscales of the HAGOS, adverse and serious adverse events, usage of painkillers (yes/no) and type of analgesics. Based on the sample size calculation, the trial needs to include 96 patients.Ethics and disseminationThe trial is approved by the Central Denmark Region Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics (Journal No 1-10-72-234-18) and by the Danish Data Protection Agency (Journal No 1-16-02-120-19). The trial is also approved by The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, Region South-East Norway (Ref. 2018/1603). All results from this trial will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals regardless of whether the results are positive, negative or inconclusive.Trial registration numberNCT03941171.
| S-EPMC7008423 | biostudies-literature