Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38221605›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2024

A volunteer-supported walking programme to improve physical function in older people with restricted mobility (the POWER Study): a randomised controlled trial.

Nina Grede, Ulrike Trampisch, Sabine Weissbach, Monika Heinzel-Gutenbrunner, Ellen Freiberger, Andreas Sönnichsen, Norbert Donner-Banzhoff

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Nina GredeInstitute of General Practice/Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany. nina.grede@staff.uni-marburg.de.
Ulrike TrampischDepartment of Human Medicine, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Sabine WeissbachDepartment of Human Medicine, Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Monika Heinzel-GutenbrunnerInstitute of General Practice/Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Ellen FreibergerInstitute for Biomedicine of Aging, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nuremberg, Germany.
Andreas SönnichsenResearch Initiative Health for Austria, Wissenschaftliche Initiative Gesundheit Für Österreich, Vienna, Austria.
Norbert Donner-BanzhoffInstitute of General Practice/Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Philipps University of Marburg · DEFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEGesundheit Österreich · ATRuhr University Bochum · DEWitten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegular physical activity has multiple health benefits, especially in older people. Therefore, the World Health Organization recommends at least 2.5 h of moderate physical activity per week. The aim of the POWER Study was to investigate whether volunteer-assisted walking improves the physical performance and health of older people.

methodsWe approached people aged 65 years and older with restricted mobility due to physical limitations and asked them to participate in this multicentre randomised controlled trial. The recruitment took place in nursing homes and the community setting. Participants randomly assigned to the intervention group were accompanied by volunteer companions for a 30-50 min walk up to three times a week for 6 months. Participants in the control group received two lectures that included health-related topics. The primary endpoint was physical function as measured with the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) at baseline and 6 and 12 months. The secondary and safety endpoints were quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), fear of falling (Falls Efficacy Scale), cognitive executive function (the Clock Drawing Test), falls, hospitalisations and death.

resultsThe sample comprised 224 participants (79% female). We failed to show superiority of the intervention with regard to physical function (SPPB) or other health outcomes in the intention-to-treat analyses. However, additional exploratory analyses suggest benefits in those who undertook regular walks. The intervention appears to be safe regarding falls.

conclusionsRegular physical activity is essential to preserve function and to improve health and quality of life. Against the background of a smaller-than-planned sample size, resulting in low power, and the interference of the COVID-19 pandemic, we suggest that community based low-threshold interventions deserve further exploration.

trial registrationThe trial was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register ( www.germanctr.de ), with number DRKS00015188 on 31/08/2018.

Indexed as

PandemicsQuality of LifeAgedExercise TherapyFearFemaleHumansMaleWalking80 and overAccidental FallsAgedCommunity SupportExerciseFunctional StatusQuality of LifeRandomised Controlled Trial

Identifiers

PMID38221605
PMCPMC10789062
OpenAlexW4390876450

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.