ArticleTranslational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine2018
Motor Control-based Group Exercise: Can It be Delivered as Effectively by Lay Leaders?
Article in Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A feasibility randomized controlled trial of a community-level physical activity strategy for older adults with motoric cognitive risk syndrome.Frontiers in aging · 2024Article
- Assessing gait efficacy in older adults: An analysis using item response theory.Gait & posture · 2020Article
- Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Planning Cluster Randomized Trials in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.Journal of aging and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeOn the Move (OTM), a motor control-based group exercise program for community-dwelling older adults, has produced greater gains in mobility than a standard group exercise program when delivered by research leaders. The purposes of this study were:1) to examine the effectiveness of OTM versus a standard program when delivered by lay leaders and 2) to compare the outcomes of OTM when delivered by research versus lay leaders.
methodsCommunity-dwelling, medically stable older adults who could walk household distances participated. OTM consisted of warm-up, timing and coordination, strengthening, and stretching exercises. The seated standard program consisted of warm-up, aerobic, strengthening and stretching exercises. The primary outcome(s) of function and disability was the Late Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI), and for walking ability were the Six Minute Walk Test and gait speed.
results126 participants (mean age = 80.7±7.8 years, gait speed = 0.91 m/s) were randomized to OTM (n=49) or standard (n=77) programs. When taught by lay leaders, there were no significant between-intervention group differences in any of the outcomes (p>0.10). Comparing OTM outcomes between leaders, there was a statistical but not clinically meaningful difference in LLFDI disability (1.87±0.89, p=0.04) when taught by research versus lay leader, and moderate differences (p=0.06) in LLFDI overall function (1.89±1.02) and gait speed (0.05±0.03). Qualitative interview responses suggest that instructor-related concerns may have impacted program outcomes.
conclusionWhen delivered by lay leaders OTM was not more effective than a standard program for improving function, disability, and mobility in older adults. Health promotion programs designed to improve mobility in community-dwelling older adults and based on a motor control theoretical background, may be best taught by rehabilitation professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.