What is the effect of a combined physical activity and fall prevention intervention enhanced with health coaching and pedometers on older adults’ physical activity levels and mobility-related goals?: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Anne Tiedemann, Serene Paul, Elisabeth Ramsay, Sandra D O’Rourke, Kathryn Chamberlain, Catherine Kirkham, Dafna Merom, Nicola Fairhall, Juliana S Oliveira, Leanne Hassett, Catherine Sherrington
Abstract
Physical inactivity and falls in older people are important public health problems. Health conditions that could be ameliorated with physical activity are particularly common in older people. One in three people aged 65 years and over fall at least once annually, often resulting in significant injuries and ongoing disability. These problems need to be urgently addressed as the population proportion of older people is rapidly rising. This trial aims to establish the impact of a combined physical activity and fall prevention intervention compared to an advice brochure on objectively measured physical activity participation and mobility-related goal attainment among people aged 60 + .
A randomised controlled trial involving 130 consenting community-dwelling older people will be conducted. Participants will be individually randomised to a control group (n = 65) and receive a fall prevention brochure, or to an intervention group (n = 65) and receive the brochure plus physical activity promotion and fall prevention intervention enhanced with health coaching and a pedometer. Primary outcomes will be objectively measured physical activity and mobility-related goal attainment, measured at both six and 12 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include: falls, the proportion of people meeting the physical activity guidelines, quality of life, fear of falling, mood, and mobility limitation. Barriers and enablers to physical activity participation will be measured 6 months after randomisation. General linear models will be used to assess the effect of group allocation on the continuously-scored primary and secondary outcome measures, after adjusting for baseline scores. Between-group differences in goal attainment (primary outcome) will be analysed with ordinal regression. The number of falls per person-year will be analysed using negative binomial regression models to estimate the between-group difference in fall rates after one year (secondary outcome). Modified Poisson regression models will compare groups on dichotomous outcome measures. Analyses will be pre-planned, conducted while masked to group allocation and will use an intention-to-treat approach.
This trial will address a key gap in evidence regarding physical activity and fall prevention for older people and will evaluate a program that could be directly implemented within Australian health services.
ACTRN12614000016639, 7/01/2014.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,271,607
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,883
of 14,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,989
of 263,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#214
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 263,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
