Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37108022›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Implementation, Feasibility, and Acceptability of MATCH to Prevent Iatrogenic Disability in Hospitalized Older Adults: A Question of Geriatric Care Program?

Eva Peyrusqué, Marie-Jeanne Kergoat, Marie-Josée Sirois, Nathalie Veillette, Raquel Fonseca, Mylène Aubertin-Leheudre

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Eva PeyrusquéCentre de Recherche, Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3W 1W4, Canada.
Marie-Jeanne KergoatCentre de Recherche, Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3W 1W4, Canada.
Marie-Josée SiroisDépartement de Réadaptation, Université de Laval, Quebec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada.
Nathalie VeilletteCentre de Recherche, Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3W 1W4, Canada.
Raquel FonsecaCentre de Recherche, Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3W 1W4, Canada.
Mylène Aubertin-LeheudreCentre de Recherche, Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3W 1W4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6796-6710

Funding

MEDTEQ-FSISS 3-2-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Senior adults (>age 65) represent almost 20% of the population but account for 48% of hospital bed occupancy. In older adults, hospitalization often results in functional decline (i.e., iatrogenic disability) and, consequently, the loss of autonomy. Physical activity (PA) has been shown to counteract these declines effectively. Nevertheless, PA is not implemented in standard clinical practice. We previously showed that MATCH, a pragmatic, specific, adapted, and unsupervised PA program, was feasible and acceptable in a geriatric assessment unit (GAU) and a COVID-19 geriatric unit. This feasibility study aims to confirm that this tool could be implemented in other geriatric care programs, notably a geriatric rehabilitation unit (GRU) and a post-acute care unit (PACU), in order to reach the maximum number of older patients. Eligibility and consent were assessed by the physician for all the patients admitted to the three units (GAU, GRU, and PACU). The rehabilitation therapist taught each participant one of the five PA programs based on their mobility score on the decisional tree. Implementation (eligibility (%): patients eligible/number admitted and delay of implementation: number of days until prescription); feasibility (adherence (%): number sessions completed/number sessions prescribed and walking time (%): total walking time/time prescribed time); and acceptability (healthcare team (%): tool adequacy (yes/no) and patient: System Usability Scale questionnaire (SUS: x/100)) were evaluated and analyzed using a Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA or Fisher's exact test. Eligibility was different between the units (GRU = 32.5% vs. PACU = 26.6% vs. GAU = 56.0%;

Indexed as

frailtygeriatric unithospital caremobilityphysical activity

Identifiers

PMID37108022
PMCPMC10138309

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.