Dataset Information

An intervention to increase physical activity in care home residents: results of a cluster-randomised, controlled feasibility trial (the REACH trial).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Care home (CH) residents are mainly inactive, leading to increased dependency and low mood. Strategies to improve activity are required.

Design and setting

Cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial with embedded process and health economic evaluations. Twelve residential CHs in Yorkshire, United Kingdom, were randomised to the MoveMore intervention plus usual care (UC) (n = 5) or UC only (n = 7).

Participants

Permanent residents aged ≥65 years.

Intervention

MoveMore: a whole home intervention involving all CH staff designed to encourage and support increase in movement of residents.

Objectives and measurements

Feasibility objectives relating to recruitment, intervention delivery, data collection and follow-up and safety concerns informed the feasibility of progression to a definitive trial. Data collection at baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months included: participants' physical function and mobility, perceived health, mood, quality of life, cognitive impairment questionnaires; accelerometry; safety data; intervention implementation.

Results

300 residents were screened; 153 were registered (62 MoveMore; 91 UC). Average cluster size: MoveMore: 12.4 CHs; UC: 13.0 CHs. There were no CH/resident withdrawals. Forty (26.1%) participants were unavailable for follow-up: 28 died (12 MoveMore; 16 UC); 12 moved from the CH. Staff informant/proxy data collection for participants was >80%; data collection from participants was <75%; at 9 months, 65.6% of residents provided valid accelerometer data; two CHs fully, two partially and one failed to implement the intervention. There were no safety concerns.

Conclusions

Recruiting CHs and residents was feasible. Intervention implementation and data collection methods need refinement before a definitive trial. There were no safety concerns.

SUBMITTER: Forster A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8581372 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Physical restraints such as bedrails and belts are regularly applied in German nursing homes despite clear evidence showing their lack of effectiveness and safety. In a cluster-randomised controlled trial, the efficacy and safety of a guideline-based multicomponent intervention programme has been proven. The present study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of two different versions of the original intervention in nursing home residents in four different regions throughout Germany. METHODS/DESIGN:The study is a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial comparing two intervention groups, i.e. (1) the updated original multicomponent intervention programme and (2) the concise version of the updated programme, with a control group receiving optimised usual care. The first intervention group receives an educational programme for all nurses, additional training and structured support for nominated key nurses, printed study material and other supportive material. In the second intervention group, nurses do not receive education as part of the intervention, but may be trained by nominated key nurses who have received a short train-the-trainer module. All other components are similar to the first intervention group. The control group receives the printed study material only. Overall, 120 nursing homes including approximately 10,800 residents will be recruited and randomly assigned to one of the three groups. The primary outcome is defined as the proportion of residents with at least one physical restraint after 12 months follow-up. The use of physical restraints will be assessed by direct observation. Secondary outcomes are the residents' quality of life and safety parameters, e.g. falls and fall-related fractures. In addition, comprehensive process and economic evaluations will be performed. CONCLUSIONS:We expect a clinically relevant reduction in the proportion of residents with physical restraints. It is also expected that the process outcomes of this trial will enrich the knowledge about facilitators and barriers for the implementation of the multicomponent intervention programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02341898.

Project description:ObjectivesChildren in China have low levels of physical activity. We developed a school-based behaviour change intervention to increase their physical activity levels. The study aimed to determine the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) in the future. This future cluster RCT will evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention.DesignFeasibility cluster non-RCT design.SettingTwo public schools (one intervention and one control) in Yangzhou, China.ParticipantsChildren aged 10-12 years and their parents.InterventionThe 16-week school-based behaviour change intervention to increase physical activity levels consisted of three components (a) health education (physical education), (b) family involvement and (c) school environment support.Outcomes measuresWe estimated important parameters that are needed to design the future cluster RCT, such as SD of the primary outcome (ie, 7-day steps in children), intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC), recruitment of child-parent dyads, follow-up of children, completion of and time needed for data collection among children and intervention attendance.ResultsSixty-four children and their parents participated in the study (32 per study group). The SD of the primary outcome was 34 519 steps. The ICC was 0.03. The recruitment and follow-up rates were 100%. The completion of data collection was 100% (except for the 7-day steps at baseline-one child lost the step log in the intervention group and two children lost their pedometer in the control group). The time needed to complete the self-reported questionnaire by children was around 15 min per study group, and the measurement of their anthropometric parameters took around 40 min per study group. The intervention attendance was 100%.ConclusionsBased on the promising recruitment, follow-up, completion of and time needed for data collection and intervention attendance, it would be feasible to undertake the future cluster RCT in China.Trial registration numberChiCTR1900026865.

Project description:Systematic reviews have identified the lack of intervention studies with young children to prevent obesity. This feasibility study examines the feasibility and acceptability of adapting the Nutrition and Physical Activity Self-Assessment for Child Care (NAP SACC) intervention in the UK to inform a full-scale trial.A feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial in 12 nurseries in England, with 6 randomly assigned to the adapted NAP SACC UK intervention: nursery staff will receive training and support from an NAP SACC UK Partner to review the nursery environment (nutrition, physical activity, sedentary behaviours and oral health) and set goals for making changes. Parents will be invited to participate in a digital media-based home component to set goals for making changes in the home. As this is a feasibility study, the sample size was not based on a power calculation but will indicate the likely response rates and intracluster correlations. Measures will be assessed at baseline and 8-10 months later. We will estimate the recruitment rate of nurseries and children and adherence to the intervention and data. Nursery measurements will include the Environmental Policy Assessment and Observation score and the nursery staff's review of the nursery environment. Child measurements will include height and weight to calculate z-score body mass index (zBMI), accelerometer-determined minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day and sedentary time, and diet using the Child and Diet Evaluation Tool. Questionnaires with nursery staff and parents will measure mediators. A process evaluation will assess fidelity of intervention delivery and views of participants.Ethical approval for this study was given by Wales 3 NHS Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be made available through publication in peer-reviewed journals, at conferences and to participants via the University of Bristol website. Data will be available from the University of Bristol Research Data Repository.ISRCTN16287377.

Project description:BackgroundMost adolescent girls in the UK do not meet government physical activity recommendations and effective interventions are needed. This study reports the results of a feasibility trial of PLAN-A, a novel school-based peer-led physical activity intervention for adolescent girls.MethodsA two-arm cluster randomised controlled feasibility study was conducted in six English secondary schools (4 intervention & 2 control). Year 8 (age 12-13) girls were eligible and randomisation was at school-level. The intervention involved training Year 8 girls (out of school for two consecutive days, plus one top-up day 5 weeks later), who were identified by their peers as influential, to provide informal support to their friends to increase their physical activity. Feasibility of the intervention and the research was examined, including: recruitment, training attendance and data provision rates, evidence of promise of the intervention to affect weekday moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), intervention cost and estimation of the sample size for a definitive trial. Accelerometer and questionnaire data were collected at the beginning of Year 8 (Time 0), the end of Year 8 (10-weeks after peer-supporter training) and the beginning of Year 9 (Time 2).ResultsFour hundred twenty-seven girls were recruited (95% recruitment rate). 55 girls consented to be a peer-supporter and 53 peer-supporters were trained (97% of those invited). Accelerometer return rates exceeded 85% at each time point and wear time criteria was met by 83%, 71% and 62% participants at Time 0, 1 and 2 respectively. Questionnaire data were provided by >91% of participants at each time point. Complete-case adjusted linear regression analysis showed evidence of a 6.09 minute (95% CI = 1.43, 10.76) between-arms difference in weekday MVPA at Time 2 in favour of the intervention arm. On average PLAN-A cost £2685 per school to deliver (£37 per Year 8 girl). There were no adverse events. A trial involving 20 schools would be adequately powered to detect a between-arms difference in weekday MVPA of at least six minutes.ConclusionsThe PLAN-A intervention adopts a novel peer-led approach, is feasible, and shows evidence of promise to positively affect girls' physical activity levels. A definitive trial is warranted.Trial registrationISCTRN, ISRCTN12543546, Registered on 28/7/2015, URL of registry record: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12543546.

Project description:Background:Diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS) leads to the earlier detection of retinopathy and treatment that can prevent or delay the development of diabetes-related blindness. However, uptake continues to be sub-optimal in many countries, including Ireland. Routine management of type 2 diabetes largely takes place in primary care. As such, there may be an opportunity in primary care to introduce interventions to improve DRS uptake. However, few studies test the feasibility of interventions to enhance DRS uptake in this context. Our aim is to investigate the feasibility of an implementation intervention (IDEAs (Improving Diabetes Eye screening Attendance)) delivered in general practice to improve the uptake of the national DRS programme, RetinaScreen. Methods:The IDEAs study is a cluster randomised pilot trial with an embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation. Following stratification by practice size, eight general practices (clusters) will be randomly allocated to intervention (n = 4) or wait-list control groups (n = 4). The intervention will be delivered for 6?months, after which, it will be administered to wait-list control practices. The intervention is multi-faceted and comprises provider-level components (training, audit and feedback, health care professional prompt, reimbursement) and patient-level components (GP-endorsed reminder with information leaflet delivered opportunistically face-to-face, and systematically by phone and letter). Patient inclusion criteria are type 1 or type 2 diabetes and DRS programme non-attendance. A multi-method approach will be used to determine screening uptake, evaluate the trial and study procedures and examine the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention from staff and patient perspectives. Quantitative and qualitative data will be collected on intervention uptake and delivery, research processes and outcomes. Data will be collected at the practice, health professional and patient level. A partial economic evaluation will be conducted to estimate the cost of delivering the implementation intervention in general practice. Formal continuation criteria will be used to determine whether IDEAs should progress to a definitive trial. Discussion:Findings will determine whether IDEAsis feasible and acceptable and will be used to refine the intervention and study procedures. A definitive trial will determine whether IDEAs is a cost-effective intervention to improve DRS uptake and reduce diabetes-related blindness. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03901898. Registered 3rd April 2019.

Project description:Background and objectivesHome dialysis therapies (peritoneal and home hemodialysis) are less expensive and provide similar outcomes to in-center hemodialysis, but they are underutilized in most health systems. Given this, we designed a multifaceted intervention to increase the use of home dialysis. In this study, our objective was to evaluate the effect of this intervention on home dialysis use in CKD clinics across Canada.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial in 55 CKD clinic clusters in nine provinces in Canada between October 2014 and November 2015. Participants included all adult patients who initiated dialysis in the year following the intervention. We evaluated the implementation of a four-component intervention, which included phone surveys from a knowledge translation broker, a 1-year center-specific audit/feedback on home dialysis use, delivery of an educational package (including tools aimed at both providers and patients), and an academic detailing visit. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients using home dialysis at 180 days after dialysis initiation.ResultsA total of 55 clinics were randomized (27 in the intervention and 28 in the control), with 5312 patients initiating dialysis in the 1-year follow-up period. In the primary analysis, there was no difference in the use of home dialysis at 180 days in the intervention and control clusters (absolute risk difference, 4%; 95% confidence interval, -2% to 10%). Using a difference-in-difference comparison, the use of home dialysis at 180 days was similar before and after implementation of the intervention (difference of 0% in intervention clinics; 95% confidence interval, -2% to 3%; difference of 0.8% in control clinics; 95% confidence interval, -1% to 3%; P=0.84).ConclusionsA multifaceted intervention did not increase the use of home dialysis in adults initiating dialysis.Clinical trial registry name and registration numberA Cluster Randomized Trial to Assess the Impact of Patient and Provider Education on Use of Home Dialysis, NCT02202018.