Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27564857›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2016

Promoting Activity in Geriatric Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Accelerometry.

Nancye M Peel, Sanjoy K Paul, Ian D Cameron, Maria Crotty, Susan E Kurrle, Leonard C Gray

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Exercise for acutely hospitalised older medical patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Physical activity monitoring-based interventions in geriatric patients: a scoping review on intervention components and clinical applicability.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2023
    Article
  12. Exploring the perspectives of clinicians on solutions to tackling physical inactivity and sedentary behaviour in older hospital patients.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Factors Associated With Walking in Older Medical Inpatients.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Challenging rehabilitation environment for older patients.Clinical interventions in aging · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nancye M PeelCentre for Research in Geriatric Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3038-8881
Sanjoy K PaulClinical Trials & Biostatistics Unit, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia.
Ian D CameronJohn Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Maria CrottyDepartment of Rehabilitation and Aged Care, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Susan E KurrleDivision of Rehabilitation and Aged Care, Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Leonard C GrayCentre for Research in Geriatric Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow activity levels in inpatient rehabilitation are associated with adverse outcomes. The study aimed to test whether activity levels can be increased by the provision of monitored activity data to patients and clinicians in the context of explicit goal setting.

methodsA randomized controlled trial in three sites in Australia included 255 inpatients aged 60 and older who had a rehabilitation goal to become ambulant. The primary outcome was patients' walking time measured by accelerometers during the rehabilitation admission. Walking times from accelerometry were made available daily to treating therapists and intervention participants to motivate patients to improve incidental activity levels and reach set goals. For the control group, 'usual care' was followed, including the setting of mobility goals; however, for this group, neither staff nor patients received data on walking times to aid the setting of daily walking time targets.

resultsThe median daily walking time in the intervention group increased from 10.3 minutes at baseline to 32.1 minutes at day 28, compared with an increase from 9.5 to 26.5 minutes per day in the control group. Subjects in the intervention group had significantly higher non-therapy walking time by about 7 minutes [mean (95% CI): 24.6 (21.7, 27.4)] compared to those in the control group [mean(95% CI): 17.3 (14.4, 20.3)] (p = 0.001).

conclusionsDaily feedback to patients and therapists using an accelerometer increased walking times during rehabilitation admissions. The results of this study suggest objective monitoring of activity levels could provide clinicians with information on clinically important, mobility-related activities to assist goal setting.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611000034932 http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/.

Indexed as

AccelerometryAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaFemaleFrail ElderlyGeriatricsGoalsHumansInpatientsMaleMiddle AgedMotivationPhysical Therapy ModalitiesRehabilitationTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID27564857
PMCPMC5001632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.