ArticleAge and ageing2025
Feasibility and acceptability of an unsupervised and adapted physical activity program (PACE tool) as pragmatic care in a geriatric outpatient clinic.
Article in Age and ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPhysical inactivity accelerates the ageing process, leading functional incapacities and physical dependence. Although physical activity (PA) is known to counteract these effects, its integration as a prescription in healthcare is uncommon due to the lack of pragmatic solutions.
aimsThis study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a pragmatic, unsupervised and adapted PA program in geriatric outpatient clinics.
methodsIn a 4-month pilot study, a 12-week adapted unsupervised PA program was prescribed using the Promote the Autonomy through exerCisE (PACE) tool. Feasibility was assessed by measuring patient inclusion, program adherence, healthcare professional workload and the tool usability score. Acceptability (Likert scale) was assessed through healthcare professional and patient satisfaction, as well as reported pain, falls and feelings of safety during program practice. Pre- and post-intervention tests were conducted to explore adaptations in physical performance adaptations.
resultsOut of the 250 eligible patients, 76 were included, with 67 consenting to the prescribed PA intervention. Ultimately, 37 participants completed the full 12-week program, averaging 3.3 weekly sessions. Notably, 70.2% adhered to the daily walking prescription. Physicians found the PACE tool 'highly relevant' and non-disruptive. Beliefs in PA benefits and kinesiologist support facilitated adoption, whilst existing pain and lack of motivation hindered adoption. No meaningful change in functional performance was noted post-intervention.
conclusionThe results suggest that implementing PACE as a prescription exercise care regimen is feasible and acceptable to both healthcare professionals and patients. However, further randomised controlled trials are needed to evaluate its health effects compared to usual care.
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.