| Title |
Effectiveness of a low-threshold physical activity intervention in residential aged care – results of a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s79360 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martin Cichocki, Viktoria Quehenberger, Michael Zeiler, Tanja Adamcik, Matthias Manousek, Tanja Stamm, Karl Krajic |
| Abstract |
Research on effectiveness of low-threshold mobility interventions that are viable for users of residential aged care is scarce. Low-threshold is defined as keeping demands on organizations (staff skills, costs) and participants (health status, discipline) rather low. The study explored the effectiveness of a multi-faceted, low-threshold physical activity program in three residential aged-care facilities in Austria. Main goals were enhancement of mobility by conducting a multi-faceted training program to foster occupational performance and thus improve different aspects of health-related quality of life (QoL). The program consisted of a weekly session of 60 minutes over a period of 20 weeks. A standardized assessment of mobility status and health-related QoL was applied before and after the intervention. A total of 222 of 276 participants completed the randomized controlled trial study (intervention group n=104, control group n=118; average age 84 years, 88% female). Subjective health status (EuroQoL-5 dimensions: P=0.001, d=0.36) improved significantly in the intervention group, and there were also positive trends in occupational performance (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure). No clear effects were found concerning the functional and cognitive measures applied. Thus, the low-threshold approach turned out to be effective primarily on subjective health-related QoL. This outcome could be a useful asset for organizations offering low-threshold physical activity interventions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 126 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 11% |
| Researcher | 13 | 10% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 20% |
| Unknown | 40 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 19% |
| Sports and Recreations | 14 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 45 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2016.
All research outputs
#8,185,927
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#786
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,139
of 278,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#10
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.