Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38869932›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2024

Remote Evidence-Based Programs for Health Promotion to Support Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: Mixed Methods Outcome Evaluation.

Lesley Steinman, Kelly Chadwick, Erica Chavez Santos, Sruthi Sravanam, Selisha Snowy Johnson, Elspeth Rensema, Caitlin Mayotte, Paige Denison, Kate Lorig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

Lesley SteinmanHealth Promotion Research Center, Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2098-5105
Kelly ChadwickHealth Promotion Research Center, Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4901-4895
Erica Chavez SantosHealth Promotion Research Center, Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9832-8757
Sruthi SravanamHealth Promotion Research Center, Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0009-0004-0207-8028
Selisha Snowy JohnsonOffice of Community Outreach and Engagement, Fred Hutch Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0009-0009-1129-1062
Elspeth RensemaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0009-0001-0775-8565
Caitlin MayotteHealth Promotion Research Center, Department of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5767-874X
Paige DenisonSound Generations, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0009-0001-0089-7730
Kate LorigSelf Management Resource Center, Aptos, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6516-2308

Funding

Transform Dissemination and Implementation Science in CTSA ProgramsUL1TR002319 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI John K. Amory · 2017 to 2026
$100.0M
Scientific/Technical CoreP2CHD042828 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SARA R. CURRAN · 2017 to 2026
$6.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002319NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042828
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based programs (EBPs) for health promotion were developed to reach older adults where they live, work, pray, and play. When the COVID-19 pandemic placed a disproportionate burden on older adults living with chronic conditions and the community-based organizations that support them, these in-person programs shifted to remote delivery. While EBPs have demonstrated effectiveness when delivered in person, less is known about outcomes when delivered remotely.

objectiveThis study evaluated changes in remote EBP participants' health and well-being in a national mixed methods outcome evaluation in January 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022.

methodsWe used the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) for equity framework to guide the evaluation. We purposively sampled for diverse remote EBP delivery modes and delivery organizations, staff, and traditionally underserved older adults, including people of color and rural dwellers. We included 5 EBPs for self-management, falls prevention, and physical activity: videoconferencing (Chronic Disease Self-Management Program, Diabetes Self-Management Program, and EnhanceFitness), telephone plus mailed materials (Chronic Pain Self-Management Program), and enhanced self-directed mailed materials (Walk With Ease). Participant and provider data included validated surveys, in-depth interviews, and open-ended survey questions. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the sample and the magnitude of change and paired t tests (2-tailed) and the Fisher exact test to test for change in outcomes between enrollment and 6-month follow-up. Thematic analysis was used to identify similarities and differences in outcomes within and across programs. Joint display tables facilitated the integration of quantitative and qualitative findings.

resultsA total of 586 older adults, 198 providers, and 37 organizations providing EBPs participated in the evaluation. Of the 586 older adults, 289 (49.3%) provided follow-up outcome data. The mean age of the EBP participants was 65.4 (SD 12.0) years. Of the 289 EBP participants, 241 (83.4%) were female, 108 (37.3%) were people of color, 113 (39.1%) lived alone, and 99 (34.3%) were experiencing financial hardship. In addition, the participants reported a mean of 2.5 (SD 1.7) chronic conditions. Overall, the remote EBP participants showed statistically significant improvements in health, energy, sleep quality, loneliness, depressive symptoms, and technology anxiety. Qualitatively, participants shared improvements in knowledge, attitudes, and skills for healthier living; reduced their social isolation and loneliness; and gained better access to programs. Three-fourths of the providers (149/198, 75.2%) felt that effectiveness was maintained when switching from in-person to remote delivery.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that participating in remote EBPs can improve health, social, and technological outcomes of interest for older adults and providers, with benefits extending to policy makers. Future policy and practice can better support remote EBP delivery as one model for health promotion, improving access for all older adults.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PromotionAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHumansMaleOutcome Assessment, Health CarePandemicsProgram EvaluationTelemedicinebehavior changechronic diseasecommunity basedevidence basedhealth equityhealth promotionmobile phoneolder adultsoutcome evaluationruraltechnology

Identifiers

PMID38869932
PMCPMC11211707

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.