Prevention of child mental health problems through parenting interventions in Southeastern Europe (RISE): study protocol for a multi-site randomised controlled trial

Abstract Background Childhood adversities, such as poor parental practices, exposure to violence, and risk behaviours strongly impact children’s future mental and behavioural problems. Adversities affect families living in disadvantaged environments and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to a greater extent than in high-income countries. Parenting programmes are an effective way to alleviate them, although their outreach and scalability is still limited in LMICs. Methods/design A multi-site randomised controlled trial will be conducted in North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova and Romania to test the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an optimised version of the promising Parenting for Lifelong Health Programme for Young Children (PLH-YC, 5 sessions), against a standard lecture on parenting issues (control group, 1 session). At least 864 participants who report having children between 2 and 9 years old who display elevated levels of behavioural difficulties will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to the intervention and control groups. The primary outcome will consist of parent report of child oppositional aggressive behaviour. Post-test (four months) and follow-up (12 months) assessments will provide information on short- and longer-term effects of PLH-YC compared to the parenting lecture in the control group. Discussion This randomised trial will test the efficacy of PLH-YC in alleviating child behavioural problems and assess the cost-effectiveness, transportability across three different cultural contexts, and potential for scalability of the programme. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov., Registration number: NCT04721730 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04721730). Registered 13.01.2021

Download Full-text

Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE): protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-019-3838-x ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Aisha Shafayat ◽

Emese Csipke ◽

Lucy Bradshaw ◽

Georgina Charlesworth ◽

Florence Day ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Usual Care ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Randomised Trial ◽

Mild Dementia ◽

Link Type ◽

Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Memory services often see people with early stage dementia who are largely independent and able to participate in community activities but who run the risk of reducing activities and social networks. PRIDE is a self-management intervention designed to promote living well and enhance independence for people with mild dementia. This study aims to examine the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the PRIDE intervention offered in addition to usual care or with usual care alone. Methods/design PRIDE is a parallel, two-arm, multicentre, feasibility, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Eligible participants aged 18 or over who have mild dementia (defined as a score of 0.5 or 1 on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale) who can participate in the intervention and provide informed consent will be randomised (1:1) to treatment with the PRIDE intervention delivered in addition to usual care, or usual care only. Participants will be followed-up at 3 and 6 month’s post-randomisation. There will be an option for a supporter to join each participant. Each supporter will be provided with questionnaires at baseline and follow-ups at 3 to 6 months. Embedded qualitative research with both participants and supporters will explore their perspectives on the intervention investigating a range of themes including acceptability and barriers and facilitators to delivery and participation. The feasibility of conducting a full RCT associated with participant recruitment and follow-up of both conditions, intervention delivery including the recruitment, training, retention of PRIDE trained facilitators, clinical outcomes, intervention and resource use costs and the acceptability of the intervention and study related procedures will be examined. Discussion This study will assess whether a definitive randomised trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of whether the PRIDE intervention offered in addition to usual care is feasible in comparison to usual care alone, and if so, will provide data to inform the design and conduct of a future trial. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN11288961, registered on 23 October 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12345678 Protocol V2.1 dated 19 June 2019.

Download Full-text

Optimising medication management in children and young people with ADHD using a computerised test (QbTest): a feasibility randomised controlled trial

Pilot and Feasibility Studies ◽

10.1186/s40814-021-00788-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Laura Williams ◽

Charlotte L. Hall ◽

Sue Brown ◽

Boliang Guo ◽

Marilyn James ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Young People ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Medication Management ◽

Control Group ◽

Global Functioning ◽

Children And Young People ◽

Link Type ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) should be closely monitored to ensure optimisation. There is growing interest in using computerised assessments of ADHD symptoms to support medication monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy of one such computerised assessment, the Quantified Behavior (Qb) Test, as part of medication management for ADHD. Methods This feasibility multi-site RCT conducted in child and adolescent mental health and community paediatric settings recruited participants aged 6–15 years diagnosed with ADHD starting stimulant medication. Participants were randomised into one of two arms: experimental (QbTest protocol) where participants completed a QbTest at baseline and two follow-up QbTests on medication (2–4 weeks and 8–10 weeks later) and control where participants received treatment as usual, including at least two follow-up consultations. Measures of parent, teacher, and clinician-rated symptoms and global functioning were completed at each time point. Clinicians recorded treatment decision-making and health economic measures were obtained. Data were analysed using multi-level modelling and participants (children and parents) and clinicians were interviewed about their experiences, resulting data were thematically analysed. Results Forty-four children and young people were randomised. Completion of study outcome measures by care-givers and teachers ranged from 52 to 78% at baseline to 47–65% at follow-up. Participants reported the questionnaires to be useful to complete. SNAP-IV inattention scores showed greater reduction in the intervention than the control group (− 5.85, 95% CI − 10.33, − 1.36,). Engagement with the intervention ranged from 100% at baseline, to 78% follow-up 1 and 57% follow-up 2. However, only 37% of QbTests were conducted in the correct time period. Interview data highlighted that the objectivity of the QbTest was appreciated by clinicians and parents. Clinicians commented that the additional time and resources required meant that it is not feasible to use QbTest for all cases. Conclusion The trial design and protocol appear to be feasible and acceptable but could be improved by modifying QbTest time periods and the method of data collection. With these changes, the protocol may be appropriate for a full trial. Adding QbTest may improve symptom outcome as measured by SNAP-IV. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03368573, prospectively registered, 11th December 2017, and ISRCTN, ISRCTN69461593, retrospectively registered, 10th April 2018

Download Full-text

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention, a peer led physical activity program for adolescent girls: results of a cluster randomised controlled trial

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity ◽

10.1186/s12966-021-01133-8 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Russell Jago ◽

Byron Tibbitts ◽

Kathryn Willis ◽

Emily Sanderson ◽

Rebecca Kandiyali ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Control Group ◽

Cluster Randomised ◽

Secondary Outcomes ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Physical activity is associated with improved health. Girls are less active than boys. Pilot work showed that a peer-led physical activity intervention called PLAN-A was a promising method of increasing physical activity in secondary school age girls. This study examined the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention. Methods We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial with Year 9 (13–14 year old) girls recruited from 20 secondary schools. Schools were randomly assigned to the PLAN-A intervention or a non-intervention control group after baseline data collection. Girls nominated students to be peer leaders. The top 18 % of girls nominated by their peers in intervention schools received three days of training designed to prepare them to support physical activity. Data were collected at two time points, baseline (T0) and 5–6 months post-intervention (T1). Participants wore an accelerometer for seven days to assess the primary outcome of mean weekday minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Multivariable mixed effects linear regression was used to estimate differences in the primary outcome between the two arms on an Intention-to-Treat (ITT) basis. Resource use and quality of life were measured and a within trial economic evaluation from a public sector perspective was conducted. Results A total of 1558 girls were recruited to the study. At T0, girls in both arms engaged in an average of 51 min of MVPA per weekday. The adjusted mean difference in weekday MVPA at T1 was − 2.84 min per day (95 % CI = -5.94 to 0.25) indicating a slightly larger decline in weekday MVPA in the intervention group. Results were broadly consistent when repeated using a multiple imputation approach and for pre-specified secondary outcomes and sub-groups. The mean cost of the PLAN-A intervention was £2817 per school, equivalent to £31 per girl. Economic analyses indicated that PLAN-A did not lead to demonstrable cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per unit change in QALY. Conclusions This study has shown that the PLAN-A intervention did not result in higher levels of weekday MVPA or associated secondary outcomes among Year 9 girls. The PLAN-A intervention should not be disseminated as a public health strategy. Trial registration ISRCTN14539759–31 May, 2018.

Download Full-text

Clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves in rheumatoid arthritis (A-GLOVES): randomised controlled trial with economic analysis

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽

10.1186/s12891-020-03917-8 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Alison Hammond ◽

Yeliz Prior ◽

Sarah Cotterill ◽

Chris Sutton ◽

Elizabeth Camacho ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Recent Change ◽

Control Group ◽

Dominant Hand ◽

Night Time ◽

Hand Pain ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Arthritis (or compression) gloves are widely prescribed to people with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of hand arthritis. They are prescribed for daytime wear to reduce hand pain and improve hand function, and/or night-time wear to reduce pain, improve sleep and reduce morning stiffness. However, evidence for their effectiveness is limited. The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves compared to placebo gloves on hand pain, stiffness and function in people with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain. Methods A parallel randomised controlled trial, in adults (≥ 18 years) with rheumatoid or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis at 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patients with persistent hand pain affecting function and/or sleep were eligible. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by recent change (or not) in medication, using permuted blocks of random sizes. Three-quarter-finger length arthritis gloves (Isotoner®: applying 23-32 mmHg pressure) (intervention) were compared to loose-fitting placebo gloves (Jobskin® classic: providing no/minimal pressure) (control). Both gloves (considered to have similar thermal qualities) were provided by occupational therapists. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded; clinicians were not. The primary outcome was dominant hand pain on activity (0–10) at 12 weeks, analysed using linear regression and intention to treat principles. Results Two hundred six participants were randomly assigned (103 per arm) and 163 (84 intervention: 79 control) completed 12-week follow-up. Hand pain improved by 1.0 (intervention) and 1.2 (control), an adjusted mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI: − 0.47 to 0.67; p = 0.72). Adverse events were reported by 51% of intervention and 36% of control group participants; with 6 and 7% respectively, discontinuing glove wear. Provision of arthritis gloves cost £129, with no additional benefit. Conclusion The trial provides evidence of no clinically important effect of arthritis gloves on any of the trial outcomes (hand pain, function and stiffness) and arthritis gloves are not cost-effective. The clinical and cost-effectiveness results support ceasing provision of arthritis gloves in routine clinical practice. Funding: National Institute for Health Research. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN25892131; Registered 05/09/2016: retrospectively registered.

Download Full-text

Protocol for an economic evaluation of the randomised controlled trial of culprit lesion only PCI versus immediate multivessel PCI in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: CULPRIT-SHOCK trial

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014849 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (8) ◽

pp. e014849 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Zahidul Quayyum ◽

Andrew Briggs ◽

Jose Robles-Zurita ◽

Keith Oldroyd ◽

Uwe Zeymer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Economic Evaluation ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Cardiogenic Shock ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Culprit Lesion ◽

Link Type ◽

Trial Analysis ◽

Life Years ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionEmergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion for patients with acute myocardial infarctions is an accepted practice. A majority of patients present with multivessel disease with additional relevant stenoses apart from the culprit lesion. In haemodynamically stable patients, there is increasing evidence from randomised trials to support the practice of immediate complete revascularisation. However, in the presence of cardiogenic shock, the optimal management strategy for additional non-culprit lesions is unknown. A multicentre randomised controlled trial, CULPRIT-SHOCK, is examining whether culprit vessel only PCI with potentially subsequent staged revascularisation is more effective than immediate multivessel PCI. This paper describes the intended economic evaluation of the trial.Methods and analysisThe economic evaluation will be conducted using a pre-trial decision model and within-trial analysis. The modelling-based analysis will provide expected costs and health outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over the lifetime for the cohort of patients included in the trial. The within-trial analysis will provide estimates of cost per life saved at 30 days and in 1 year, and estimates of health-related quality of life. Bootstrapping and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will be used to address any uncertainty around these estimates. Different types of regression models within a generalised estimating equation framework will be used to examine how the total cost and quality-adjusted life years are explained by patients’ characteristics, revascularisation strategy, country and centre. The cost-effectiveness analysis will be from the perspective of each country’s national health services, where costs will be expressed in euros adjusted for purchasing power parity.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for the study was granted by the local Ethics Committee at each recruiting centre. The economic evaluation analyses will be published in peer-reviewed journals of the concerned literature and communicated through the profiles of the authors atwww.twitter.comandwww.researchgate.net.Trial registration numberNCT01927549; Pre-results.

Download Full-text

Healthy Parent Carers peer-led group-based health promotion intervention for parent carers of disabled children: protocol for a feasibility study using a parallel group randomised controlled trial design

Pilot and Feasibility Studies ◽

10.1186/s40814-019-0517-3 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Gretchen Bjornstad ◽

Kath Wilkinson ◽

Beth Cuffe-Fuller ◽

Katharine Fitzpatrick ◽

Aleksandra Borek ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Trial Design ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Well Being ◽

Online Resources ◽

Disabled Children ◽

Link Type ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Parent carers of disabled children are at increased risk of mental and physical health problems. They often experience challenges to maintaining good health which have implications for their well-being and their ability to care for their children. In response to these needs, researchers and parent carers developed the Healthy Parent Carers (HPC) programme. It is a peer-led, group-based intervention that promotes behaviours associated with health and well-being. The aims of this trial are to assess the acceptability of the HPC programme and the feasibility of its delivery in the community and to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the design of the definitive trial to evaluate the programme’s effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Methods We will establish six research sites and train facilitators to deliver the manualised intervention. Parent carers of children with special educational needs and disabilities will be individually randomised, stratified by group delivery site, to either take part in a group programme and online resources (intervention) or to receive access to the online resources only (control). Measures of mental health; well-being; health-related quality of life; health behaviours; patient activation; protective factors such as resilience, social connections, and practical support; and use of health care, social care, and wider societal resources will be collected before randomisation (baseline), immediately post-intervention, and 6 months later. Recruitment of participants, adherence to the programme, and the dose received will be assessed. Group sessions will be audio-recorded to evaluate the fidelity of delivery and participant engagement. Participants’ and facilitators’ feedback on the programme content and delivery, their experience, and the acceptability of the outcome measures and trial design will be collected through feedback forms, interviews, and focus groups. Discussion This trial will assess whether the programme delivery and evaluative trial design are feasible, to inform whether to progress to a definitive randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Healthy Parent Carers programme. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN151144652, registered on 25 October 2018; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03705221, registered on 15 October 2018.

Download Full-text

Individualised screening for diabetic retinopathy: the ISDR study—rationale, design and methodology for a randomised controlled trial comparing annual and individualised risk-based variable-interval screening

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025788 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (6) ◽

pp. e025788 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Deborah M Broadbent ◽

Christopher J Sampson ◽

Amu Wang ◽

Lola Howard ◽

Abigail E Williams ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diabetic Retinopathy ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Screening Programme ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Randomised Trial ◽

Variable Interval ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

The Uk

IntroductionCurrently, all people with diabetes (PWD) aged 12 years and over in the UK are invited for screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR) annually. Resources are not increasing despite a 5% increase in the numbers of PWD nationwide each year. We describe the rationale, design and methodology for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the safety, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of personalised variable-interval risk-based screening for DR. This is the first randomised trial of personalised screening for DR and the largest ophthalmic RCT in the UK.Methods and analysisPWD attending seven screening clinics in the Liverpool Diabetic Eye Screening Programme were recruited into a single site RCT with a 1:1 allocation to individualised risk-based variable-interval or annual screening intervals. A risk calculation engine developed for the trial estimates the probability that an individual will develop referable disease (screen positive DR) within the next 6, 12 or 24 months using demographic, retinopathy and systemic risk factor data from primary care and screening programme records. Dynamic, secure, real-time data connections have been developed. The primary outcome is attendance for follow-up screening. We will test for equivalence in attendance rates between the two arms. Secondary outcomes are rates and severity of DR, visual outcomes, cost-effectiveness and health-related quality of life. The required sample size was 4460 PWD. Recruitment is complete, and the trial is in follow-up.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from National Research Ethics Service Committee North West – Preston, reference 14/NW/0034. Results will be presented at international meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. This pragmatic RCT will inform screening policy in the UK and elsewhere.Trial registration numberISRCTN87561257; Pre-results.

Download Full-text

EXPRESS: Protocol of a randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS).

International Journal of Stroke ◽

10.1177/17474930211022678 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 174749302110226

Author(s):

Dominique Cadilhac ◽

Jan Cameron ◽

Monique F Kilkenny ◽

Nadine Elizabeth Andrew ◽

Dawn Harris ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Sample Size ◽

Goal Attainment ◽

Unmet Needs ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Community Support ◽

Control Group ◽

Hospital Emergency ◽

Randomised Controlled

Rationale: To address unmet needs, electronic messages to support person-centred goal attainment and secondary prevention may avoid hospital presentations/readmissions after stroke, but evidence is limited. Hypothesis: Compared to control participants, there will be a 10% lower proportion of intervention participants who represent to hospital (emergency/admission) within 90 days of randomisation. Methods and design: Multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis. The intervention group receives 12 weeks of personalised, goal-centred and administrative electronic messages, while the control group only receives administrative messages. The trial includes a process evaluation, assessment of treatment fidelity and an economic evaluation. Participants: Confirmed stroke (modified Rankin Score: 0-4), aged â¥18 years with internet/mobile phone access, discharged directly home from hospital. Randomisation: 1:1 computer-generated, stratified by age and baseline disability. Outcomes Assessments: Collected at 90 days and 12 months following randomisation. Outcomes: Primary: Hospital emergency presentations/admissions within 90 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include goal attainment, self-efficacy, mood, unmet needs, disability, quality-of-life, recurrent stroke/cardiovascular events/deaths at 90 days and 12 months, and death and cost-effectiveness at 12 months. Sample size: To test our primary hypothesis, we estimated a sample size of 890 participants (445 per group) with 80% power and two-tailed significance threshold of Î±=0.05. Given uncertainty for the effect size of this novel intervention, the sample size will be adaptively re-estimated when outcomes for n=668 are obtained, with maximum sample capped at 1100. Discussion: We will provide new evidence on the potential effectiveness, implementation and cost-effectiveness of a tailored eHealth intervention for survivors of stroke.

Download Full-text

Update to the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a mindfulness training programme in schools compared with normal school provision (MYRIAD): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-021-05213-9 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Jesus Montero-Marin ◽

◽

Elizabeth Nuthall ◽

Sarah Byford ◽

Catherine Crane ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Study Protocol ◽

Primary Endpoint ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Mindfulness Training ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Link Type ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background MYRIAD (My Resilience in Adolescence) is a superiority, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial designed to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a mindfulness training (MT) programme, compared with normal social and emotional learning (SEL) school provision to enhance mental health, social-emotional-behavioural functioning and well-being in adolescence. The original trial protocol was published in Trials (accessible at 10.1186/s13063-017-1917-4). This included recruitment in two cohorts, enabling the learning from the smaller first cohort to be incorporated in the second cohort. Here we describe final amendments to the study protocol and discuss their underlying rationale. Methods Four major changes were introduced into the study protocol: (1) there were changes in eligibility criteria, including a clearer operational definition to assess the degree of SEL implementation in schools, and also new criteria to avoid experimental contamination; (2) the number of schools and pupils that had to be recruited was increased based on what we learned in the first cohort; (3) some changes were made to the secondary outcome measures to improve their validity and ability to measure constructs of interest and to reduce the burden on school staff; and (4) the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) pandemic both influences and makes it difficult to interpret the 2-year follow-up primary endpoint results, so we changed our primary endpoint to 1-year follow-up. Discussion These changes to the study protocol were approved by the Trial Management Group, Trial Steering Committee and Data and Ethics Monitoring Committees and improved the enrolment of participants and quality of measures. Furthermore, the change in the primary endpoint will give a more reliable answer to our primary question because it was collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic in both cohort 1 and cohort 2. Nevertheless, the longer 2-year follow-up data will still be acquired, although this time-point will be now framed as a second major investigation to answer some new important questions presented by the combination of the pandemic and our study design. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials ISRCTN86619085. Registered on 3 June 2016.

Download Full-text

Evaluating the effects of an exercise program (Staying UpRight) for older adults in long-term care on rates of falls: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Trials ◽

10.1186/s13063-019-3949-4 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Lynne Taylor ◽

John Parsons ◽

Denise Taylor ◽

Elizabeth Binns ◽

Sue Lord ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Older Adults ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Long Term Care ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Exercise Program ◽

Control Group ◽

Term Care ◽

Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Falls are two to four times more frequent amongst older adults living in long-term care (LTC) than community-dwelling older adults and have deleterious consequences. It is hypothesised that a progressive exercise program targeting balance and strength will reduce fall rates when compared to a seated exercise program and do so cost effectively. Methods/design This is a single blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded assessment of outcome and intention-to-treat analysis. LTC residents (age ≥ 65 years) will be recruited from LTC facilities in New Zealand. Participants (n = 528 total, with a 1:1 allocation ratio) will be randomly assigned to either a novel exercise program (Staying UpRight), comprising strength and balance exercises designed specifically for LTC and acceptable to people with dementia (intervention group), or a seated exercise program (control group). The intervention and control group classes will be delivered for 1 h twice weekly over 1 year. The primary outcome is rate of falls (per 1000 person years) within the intervention period. Secondary outcomes will be risk of falling (the proportion of fallers per group), fall rate relative to activity exposure, hospitalisation for fall-related injury, change in gait variability, volume and patterns of ambulatory activity and change in physical performance assessed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness will be examined using intervention and health service costs. The trial commenced recruitment on 30 November 2018. Discussion This study evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a progressive strength and balance exercise program for aged care residents to reduce falls. The outcomes will aid development of evidenced-based exercise programmes for this vulnerable population. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618001827224. Registered on 9 November 2018. Universal trial number U1111-1217-7148.

Download Full-text