Measurements of daily energy intake and total energy expenditure in people with dementia in care homes: the use of wearable technology.

Objectives: To estimate daily total energy expenditure (TEE) using a physical activity monitor, combined with dietary assessment of energy intake to assess the relationship between daily energy expenditure and patterns of activity with energy intake in people with dementia living in care homes. Design and setting: A cross-sectional study in care homes in the UK. Participants: Twenty residents with confirmed dementia diagnosis were recruited from two care homes that specialised in dementia care. Measurements: A physical activity monitor (Sensewear TM Armband , Body Media, Pittsburgh, PA) was employed to objectively determine total energy expenditure, sleep duration and physical activity. The armband was placed around the left upper triceps for up to 7 days. Energy intake was determined by weighing all food and drink items over 4 days (3 weekdays and 1 weekend day) including measurements of food wastage. Results: The mean age was 78.7 (SD ± 11.8) years, Body Mass Index (BMI) 23.0 (SD ± 4.2) kg/m2 ; 50% were women. Energy intake (mean 7.4; SD ± 2.6) MJ/d) was correlated with TEE (mean 7.6; SD ± 1.8 MJ/d; r=0.49, p<0.05). Duration of sleeping ranged from 0.4-12.5 (mean 6.1) hrs/d and time spent lying down was 1.3-16.0 (8.3) hrs/d. On average residents spent 17.9 (6.3-23.4) hrs/d undertaking sedentary activity. TEE was correlated with BMI (r=0.52, p<0.05) and body weight (r=0.81, p<0.001) but inversely related to sleep duration (r=-0.59, p<0.01) and time lying down (r=-0.62, p<0.01). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that after taking BMI, sleep duration and time spent lying down into account, TEE was no longer correlated with energy intake. Conclusions: The results show the extent to which body mass, variable activity and sleep patterns may be contributing to TEE and together with reduced energy intake, energy requirements were not satisfied. Thus wearable technology has the potential to offer real-time monitoring to provide appropriate nutrition management that is more person-centred to prevent weight loss in dementi

Specific treatment of problems of the spine (STOPS): design of a randomised controlled trial comparing specific physiotherapy versus advice for people with subacute low back disorders

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Low back disorders are a common and costly cause of pain and activity limitation in adults. Few treatment options have demonstrated clinically meaningful benefits apart from advice which is recommended in all international guidelines. Clinical heterogeneity of participants in clinical trials is hypothesised as reducing the likelihood of demonstrating treatment effects, and sampling of more homogenous subgroups is recommended. We propose five subgroups that allow the delivery of specific physiotherapy treatment targeting the pathoanatomical, neurophysiological and psychosocial components of low back disorders. The aim of this article is to describe the methodology of a randomised controlled trial comparing specific physiotherapy treatment to advice for people classified into five subacute low back disorder subgroups.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A multi-centre parallel group randomised controlled trial is proposed. A minimum of 250 participants with subacute (6 weeks to 6 months) low back pain and/or referred leg pain will be classified into one of five subgroups and then randomly allocated to receive either physiotherapy advice (2 sessions over 10 weeks) or specific physiotherapy treatment (10 sessions over 10 weeks) tailored according to the subgroup of the participant. Outcomes will be assessed at 5 weeks, 10 weeks, 6 months and 12 months following randomisation. Primary outcomes will be activity limitation measured with a modified Oswestry Disability Index as well as leg and back pain intensity measured on separate 0-10 Numerical Rating Scales. Secondary outcomes will include a 7-point global rating of change scale, satisfaction with physiotherapy treatment, satisfaction with treatment results, the Sciatica Frequency and Bothersomeness Scale, quality of life (EuroQol-5D), interference with work, and psychosocial risk factors (Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire). Adverse events and co-interventions will also be measured. Data will be analysed according to intention to treat principles, using linear mixed models for continuous outcomes, Mann Whitney U tests for ordinal outcomes, and Chi-square, risk ratios and risk differences for dichotomous outcomes.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This trial will determine the difference in outcomes between specific physiotherapy treatment tailored to each of the five subgroups versus advice which is recommended in guidelines as a suitable treatment for most people with a low back disorder.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): <a href="http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12609000834257.aspx">ACTRN12609000834257</a>.</p