Active video games for improving physical performance measures in older people: a meta-analysis

Background and Purpose: Participation in regular physical activity is associated with better physical function in older people (>65 years); however, older people are the least active of all age groups. Exercise-based active video games (AVGs) offer an alternative to traditional exercise programs aimed at maintaining or enhancing physical performance measures in older people. This review systematically evaluated whether AVGs could improve measures of physical performance in older people. Secondary measures of safety, game appeal, and usability were also considered. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials published up to April 2015. Included were trials with 2 or more arms that evaluated the effect of AVGs on outcome measures of physical performance in older people. Results: Eighteen randomized controlled trials (n = 765) were included. Most trials limited inclusion to healthy community-dwelling older people. With the exception of 1 trial, all AVG programs were supervised. Using meta-analyses, AVGs were found to be more effective than conventional exercise (mean difference [MD], 4.33; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 2.93-5.73) or no intervention (MD, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.17-1.29) for improving Berg Balance scores in community-dwelling older people. Active video games were also more effective than control for improving 30-second sit-to-stand scores (MD, 3.99; 95% CI, 1.92-6.05). No significant differences in Timed Up and Go scores were found when AVGs were compared with no intervention or with conventional exercise. Conclusions: Active video games can improve measures of mobility and balance in older people when used either on their own or as part of an exercise program. It is not yet clear whether AVGs are equally suitable for older people with significant cognitive impairments or balance or mobility limitations. Given the positive findings to date, consideration could be given to further development of age-appropriate AVGs for use by older people with balance or mobility limitations

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy in older people: a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the findings of an updated Cochrane review of interventions aimed at improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy in older people. DESIGN: Cochrane systematic review. Multiple electronic databases were searched including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from inception to November 2013). Hand searching of references was also performed. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series analyses reporting on interventions targeting appropriate polypharmacy in older people in any healthcare setting were included if they used a validated measure of prescribing appropriateness. Evidence quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). SETTING: All healthcare settings. PARTICIPANTS: Older people (≥65 years) with ≥1 long-term condition who were receiving polypharmacy (≥4 regular medicines). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the change in prevalence of appropriate polypharmacy and hospital admissions. Medication-related problems (eg, adverse drug reactions), medication adherence and quality of life were included as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 12 studies were included: 8 RCTs, 2 cluster RCTs and 2 controlled before-and-after studies. 1 study involved computerised decision support and 11 comprised pharmaceutical care approaches across various settings. Appropriateness was measured using validated tools, including the Medication Appropriateness Index, Beers’ criteria and Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP)/ Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START). The interventions demonstrated a reduction in inappropriate prescribing. Evidence of effect on hospital admissions and medication-related problems was conflicting. No differences in health-related quality of life were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The included interventions demonstrated improvements in appropriate polypharmacy based on reductions in inappropriate prescribing. However, it remains unclear if interventions resulted in clinically significant improvements (eg, in terms of hospital admissions). Future intervention studies would benefit from available guidance on intervention development, evaluation and reporting to facilitate replication in clinical practice

Nutrition risk: cultural aspects of assessment

Aim: To assess a nutrition risk screening tool amongst Māori and non-Māori of advanced age. Method: A cross sectional feasibility study was conducted in three North Island locations. One hundred and eight communityliving residents aged 75-85 years were assessed for nutrition risk using 'the validated questionnaire 'Seniors in the Community: Risk Evaluation for Eating and Nutrition', Version II (SCREENII) and level of physical activity using the 'Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly' (PASE). Physical assessments included height and weight. Results: Fifty-two percent of participants were assessed to be at high nutrition risk (SCREENII score <50; range 29-58; out of maximum score 64). Nutrition risk factors amongst Māori and non-Māori respectively differed for weight change in the previous six months (45.2% and 18.7%, p=0.005), skipping meals (54.8% and 13.3%, p<0.001), fruit and vegetable intake (77.4% and 18.7%, p<0.001) and the use of meal replacements (28.1% and 9.3%, p=0.013). Process evaluation showed that Māori took different meaning from the individual question items in SCREENII. Level of physical activity (PASE score) was higher for Māori, median (IQR): 125 (74) than non-Māori, 72 (74) (p<0.001) especially for leisure-time and household related activity. BMI was higher for Māori median (IQR): 31.5 kg/m 2 (6.8) compared to non-Māori 24.7 kg/m 2 (5.4) (p<0.001). Conclusions: The nutrition risk tool suggested that Māori were at high risk for malnutrition despite higher BMI and higher levels of activity. Several items of the screening tool were interpreted differently among Māori compared to non-Māori. Further development is needed to ensure accurate assessment

The Healthy Steps Study: A randomized controlled trial of a pedometer-based Green Prescription for older adults. Trial protocol

Background: Graded health benefits of physical activity have been demonstrated for the reduction of coronary heart disease, some cancers, and type-2 diabetes, and for injury reduction and improvements in mental health. Older adults are particularly at risk of physical inactivity, and would greatly benefit from successful targeted physical activity interventions. Methods/Design: The Healthy Steps study is a 12-month randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of a pedometer-based Green Prescription with the conventional time-based Green Prescription in increasing and maintaining physical activity levels in low-active adults over 65 years of age. The Green Prescription interventions involve a primary care physical activity prescription with 3 follow-up telephone counselling sessions delivered by trained physical activity counsellors over 3 months. Those in the pedometer group received a pedometer and counselling based around increasing steps that can be monitored on the pedometer, while those in the standard Green Prescription group received counselling using time-based goals. Baseline, 3 month (end of intervention), and 12 month measures were assessed in face-to-face home visits with outcomes measures being physical activity (Auckland Heart Study Physical Activity Questionnaire), quality of life (SF-36 and EQ-5D), depressive symptoms (Geriatric Depression Scale), blood pressure, weight status, functional status (gait speed, chair stands, and tandem balance test) and falls and adverse events (self-report). Utilisation of health services was assessed for the economic evaluation carried out alongside this trial. As well, a process evaluation of the interventions and an examination of barriers and motives for physical activity in the sample were conducted. The perceptions of primary care physicians in relation to delivering physical activity counselling were also assessed. Discussion: The findings from the Healthy Steps trial are due in late 2009. If successful in improving physical activity in older adults, the pedometer-based Green Prescription could assist in reducing utilisation of health services and improve cardiovascular health and reduction of risk for a range of non-communicable lifestyles diseases

How are falls and fear of falling associated with objectively measured physical activity in a cohort of community-dwelling older men?

BACKGROUND: Falls affect approximately one third of community-dwelling older adults each year and have serious health and social consequences. Fear of falling (FOF) (lack of confidence in maintaining balance during normal activities) affects many older adults, irrespective of whether they have actually experienced falls. Both falls and fear of falls may result in restrictions of physical activity, which in turn have health consequences. To date the relation between (i) falls and (ii) fear of falling with physical activity have not been investigated using objectively measured activity data which permits examination of different intensities of activity and sedentary behaviour. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 1680 men aged 71-92 years recruited from primary care practices who were part of an on-going population-based cohort. Men reported falls history in previous 12 months, FOF, health status and demographic characteristics. Men wore a GT3x accelerometer over the hip for 7 days. RESULTS: Among the 12% of men who had recurrent falls, daily activity levels were lower than among non-fallers; 942 (95% CI 503, 1381) fewer steps/day, 12(95% CI 2, 22) minutes less in light activity, 10(95% CI 5, 15) minutes less in moderate to vigorous PA [MVPA] and 22(95% CI 9, 35) minutes more in sedentary behaviour. 16% (n = 254) of men reported FOF, of whom 52% (n = 133) had fallen in the past year. Physical activity deficits were even greater in the men who reported that they were fearful of falling than in men who had fallen. Men who were fearful of falling took 1766(95% CI 1391, 2142) fewer steps/day than men who were not fearful, and spent 27(95% CI 18, 36) minutes less in light PA, 18(95% CI 13, 22) minutes less in MVPA, and 45(95% CI 34, 56) minutes more in sedentary behaviour. The significant differences in activity levels between (i) fallers and non-fallers and (ii) men who were fearful of falling or not fearful, were mediated by similar variables; lower exercise self-efficacy, fewer excursions from home and more mobility difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: Falls and in particular fear of falling are important barriers to older people gaining health benefits of walking and MVPA. Future studies should assess the longitudinal associations between falls and physical activity

Recruiting and retaining GPs and patients in intervention studies: the DEPS-GP project as a case study

Background: Recruiting and retaining GPs for research can prove difficult, and may result in sub-optimal patient participation where GPs are required to recruit patients. Low participation rates may affect the validity of research. This paper describes a multi-faceted approach to maximise participation of GPs and their patients in intervention studies, using an Australian randomised controlled trial of a depression/suicidality management intervention as a case study. The paper aims to outline experiences that may be of interest to others considering engaging GPs and/or their patients in primary care studies. Methods: A case study approach is used to describe strategies for: (a) recruiting GPs; (b) encouraging GPs to recruit patients to complete a postal questionnaire; and (c) encouraging GPs to recruit patients as part of a practice audit. Participant retention strategies are discussed in light of reasons for withdrawal. Results: The strategies described, led to the recruitment of a higher than expected number of GPs (n = 772). Three hundred and eighty three GPs (49.6%) followed through with the intent to participate by sending out a total of 77,820 postal questionnaires, 22,251 (28.6%) of which were returned. Three hundred and three GPs (37.0%) participated in the practice audit, which aimed to recruit 20 patients per participating GP (i.e., a total of 6,060 older adults). In total, 5,143 patients (84.9%) were represented in the audit. Conclusion: Inexpensive methods were chosen to identify and recruit GPs; these relied on an existing database, minor promotion and a letter of invitation. Anecdotally, participating GPs agreed to be involved because they had an interest in the topic, believed the study would not impinge too greatly on their time, and appreciated the professional recognition afforded by the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) points associated with study participation. The study team established a strong rapport with GPs and their reception staff, offered clear instructions, and were as flexible and helpful as possible to retain GP participants. Nonetheless, we experienced attrition due to GPs' competing demands, eligibility, personnel issues and the perceived impact of the study on patients. A summary of effective and ineffective methods for recruitment and retention is provided.Michelle K Williamson, Jane Pirkis, Jon J Pfaff, Orla Tyson, Moira Sim, Ngaire Kerse, Nicola T Lautenschlager, Nigel P Stocks and Osvaldo P Almeid

Development of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using a theory-based method

BACKGROUND: It is advocated that interventions to improve clinical practice should be developed using a systematic approach and intervention development methods should be reported. However, previous interventions aimed at ensuring that older people receive appropriate polypharmacy have lacked details on their development. This study formed part of a multiphase research project which aimed to develop an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. METHODS: The target behaviours for the intervention were prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older patients by general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists. Intervention development followed a systematic approach, including previous mapping of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to key domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework that were perceived by GPs and pharmacists to influence the target behaviours. Draft interventions were developed to operationalise selected BCTs through team discussion. Selection of an intervention for feasibility testing was guided by a subset of the APEASE (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, Equity) criteria. RESULTS: Three draft interventions comprising selected BCTs were developed, targeting patients, pharmacists and GPs, respectively. Following assessment of each intervention using a subset of the APEASE criteria (affordability, practicability, acceptability), the GP-targeted intervention was selected for feasibility testing. This intervention will involve a demonstration of the behaviour and will be delivered as an online video. The video demonstrating how GPs can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a typical consultation with an older patient will also demonstrate salience of consequences (feedback emphasising the positive outcomes of performing the behaviour). Action plans and prompts/cues will be used as complementary intervention components. The intervention is designed to facilitate the prescribing of appropriate polypharmacy in routine practice. CONCLUSION: A GP-targeted intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people has been developed using a systematic approach. Intervention content has been specified using an established taxonomy of BCTs and selected to maximise feasibility. The results of a future feasibility study will help to determine if the theory-based intervention requires further refinement before progressing to a larger scale randomised evaluation

Improving appropriate polypharmacy for older people in primary care: selecting components of an evidence-based intervention to target prescribing and dispensing

Background The use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy) is increasingly common in older people. Ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate combinations of medications (appropriate polypharmacy) is a significant challenge. The quality of evidence to support the effectiveness of interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is low. Systematic identification of mediators of behaviour change, using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), provides a theoretically robust evidence base to inform intervention design. This study aimed to (1) identify key theoretical domains that were perceived to influence the prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older patients by general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists, and (2) map domains to associated behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to include as components of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of each healthcare professional (HCP) group using tailored topic guides based on TDF version 1 (12 domains). Questions covering each domain explored HCPs’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to ensuring the prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older people. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis involved the framework method and content analysis. Key domains were identified and mapped to BCTs based on established methods and discussion within the research team. Results Thirty HCPs were interviewed (15 GPs, 15 pharmacists). Eight key domains were identified, perceived to influence prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy: ‘Skills’, ‘Beliefs about capabilities’, ‘Beliefs about consequences’, ‘Environmental context and resources’, ‘Memory, attention and decision processes’, ‘Social/professional role and identity’, ‘Social influences’ and ‘Behavioural regulation’. Following mapping, four BCTs were selected for inclusion in an intervention for GPs or pharmacists: ‘Action planning’, ‘Prompts/cues’, ‘Modelling or demonstrating of behaviour’ and ‘Salience of consequences’. An additional BCT (‘Social support or encouragement’) was selected for inclusion in a community pharmacy-based intervention in order to address barriers relating to interprofessional working that were encountered by pharmacists. Conclusions Selected BCTs will be operationalised in a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy for older people, to be delivered in GP practice and community pharmacy settings. Future research will involve development and feasibility testing of this intervention