Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32161660›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020

A randomised feasibility study assessing an intervention to keep adults physically active after falls management exercise programmes end.

Sarah Audsley, Denise Kendrick, Pip Logan, Matthew Jones, Elizabeth Orton

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03824015 (Keeping Adults Physically Active), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT03824015 nacompletednot on this map

Keeping Adults Physically Active: Randomised Controlled Feasibility Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2017 to 2018Enrolled50ConditionsPhysical Activity, Falls PreventionArmsKeeping Adults Physically Active (KAPA) intervention, Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The MIPAM trial - motivational interviewing and physical activity monitoring to enhance the daily level of physical activity among older adults - a randomized controlled trial.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah Audsley1Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0372-6881
Denise Kendrick1Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK.
Pip Logan2Division of Rehabilitation, Ageing and Wellbeing, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Matthew Jones1Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK.
Elizabeth Orton1Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK.
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical inactivity contributes to disability and falls in older adults. Falls prevention exercise (FaME) programmes improve physical activity and physical function and reduce falling rates. Improvements in physical function are reduced, and falls rates increase, if physical activity is not maintained. This research investigated the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention that aimed to maintain physical activity in older adults exiting FaME.

methodsThe Keeping Adults Physically Active (KAPA) intervention comprised of six group sessions of motivational interviewing, delivered monthly by trained and mentor-supported postural stability instructor's after the FaME programme ceased. The KAPA intervention included participant manuals, illustrated exercise books, physical activity diaries and pedometers. A feasibility study was conducted in 8 FaME classes. The study design was a two-arm, cluster randomised, multi-site feasibility study comparing the KAPA intervention with usual care. A sample of 50 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years old or older were recruited. Recruitment, retention and attendance rates, self-reported physical activity and participant interviews were used to examine the feasibility and acceptability of the KAPA intervention.

resultsFifty of the sixty-seven (74.6%) participants invited into the study agreed to take part, 94.2% of the available KAPA sessions were attended and 92.3% of the recruited participants provided outcome data. The KAPA participants expressed positive views about the venues and postural stability instructors and reported enjoying the group interactions. Intervention participants discussed increasing their physical activity in response to the peer-support, illustrated home exercise booklet, physical activity diaries and pedometers. Most discussed the written tasks to be the least enjoyable element of the KAPA intervention. The proportion of participants reporting at least 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per week rose from 56.3 to 62.5% in the intervention arm and from 41.4 to 52.0% in the usual care arm.

conclusionsThe participants found the KAPA intervention acceptable. Participants reported the exercise booklet, peer support and the physical activity monitoring tools encouraged them to keep active. A full-scale trial is needed to assess whether physical activity can be significantly maintained in response to the KAPA intervention.

trial registrationRetrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03824015).

Indexed as

Falls preventionFeasibility studyOlder adultsPhysical activity

Identifiers

PMID32161660
PMCPMC7060620
OpenAlexW3012289622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.