Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27897406›Full record

Trial reportJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2017

Integrated care for geriatric frailty and sarcopenia: a randomized control trial.

Ding-Cheng Derrick Chan, Hsiao-Hui Tsou, Chirn-Bin Chang, Rong-Sen Yang, Jau-Yih Tsauo, Ching-Yu Chen, Chin-Fu Hsiao, Ya-Ting Hsu, Chia-Hui Chen, Shu-Fang Chang and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Delaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Ding-Cheng Derrick ChanDepartment of Geriatrics and Gerontology, and Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hsiao-Hui TsouDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Institute of Population Health Sciences, National Health Research Institutes, Zhunan, Taiwan.
Chirn-Bin ChangDepartment of Geriatrics and Gerontology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Rong-Sen YangDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Jau-Yih TsauoSchool and Graduate Institute of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ching-Yu ChenDepartment of Family Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chin-Fu HsiaoDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Institute of Population Health Sciences, National Health Research Institutes, Zhunan, Taiwan.
Ya-Ting HsuDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Institute of Population Health Sciences, National Health Research Institutes, Zhunan, Taiwan.
Chia-Hui ChenDepartment of Psychiatry, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
Shu-Fang ChangDepartment of Nursing, College of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chao Agnes HsiungDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Institute of Population Health Sciences, National Health Research Institutes, Zhunan, Taiwan.
Ken N KuoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
National Health Research Institutes · TWNational Taiwan University Hospital · TWNational Taipei University of Nursing and Health Science · TWNational Taiwan University · TWTaipei Medical University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExercise, nutrition, and psychological interventions may all have positive impacts on frailty and sarcopenia. However, it is not known whether an integrated care programme with all three components can be beneficial and the intensity of such programme is also not certain. In this study, we aim to determine the effectiveness of two levels of integrated care on frailty and sarcopenia.

methodsA randomized control trial was conducted at two community hospitals in Taiwan. Older adults (65-79 years of age, N = 289) who scored ≥1 on the Cardiovascular Health Study Phenotypic Classification of Frailty (CHS_PCF) were enrolled in the trial. Low-level care (LLC) participants received a 2 h education course on frailty, sarcopenia, coping strategy, nutrition, and demonstration of study exercise programme. Educational multimedia material was distributed as reference for home practice with bi-monthly telephone follow-ups on adherences. High-level care (HLC) participants, in addition to LLC instructions, received six sessions of on-site problem solving therapy and 48 exercise sessions within 6 months. Brief nutrition consultation was also provided during the exercise sessions. Primary outcome was improvement of the CHS_PCF by at least one category (from pre-frail to robust, or from frail to pre-frail or robust) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included changes of individual frailty, and sarcopenia indicators. Assessments were done at 3, 6, and 12 months by trained research assistants blinded to randomization status. Intention-to-treat analysis was applied.

resultsMean age was 71.6 ± 4.3 years, with 53% females. For the entire cohort, improvement of primary outcome was 35% at 3 months, increased to 40% at 6 months, and remained stable at 39% at 12 months. Improvement rates were similar in both groups. Compared with the LLC group, HLC participants had greater improvements in the following indices: energy expenditure of walking, 5 m walking time, dominant hand grip strength, timed-up-and-go-test, and one-leg-stand time - mainly at 6 and 12 month assessments.

conclusionsThe 6 month integrated care improved frailty and sarcopenia status among community-dwelling elders, with high-intensity training yielding greater improvements. Low-level care could be promoted as a basic intervention, while HLC could be reserved for those at high risk and with high motivation.

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyFrail ElderlyNutrition TherapyAgedFemaleFrailtyHumansMalePatient CarePatient Education as TopicSarcopeniaTaiwanAgedEffectivenessFrailtyRandomized control trialSarcopenia

Identifiers

PMID27897406
PMCPMC5326822
OpenAlexW2511492152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.