Cargando…
Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study
OBJECTIVES: Progressive resistance training can successfully target functional decline in healthy older community-dwelling adults. There are concerns about the safety and acceptance of its use in frail older populations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using progressive resi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
HYLONOME PUBLICATIONS
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8017350/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33817447 http://dx.doi.org/10.22540/JFSF-06-014 |
_version_ | 1783674048943751168 |
---|---|
author | Coleman, Sinéad A. Cunningham, Conal J. Murphy, Niamh Feaheny, Jean Robinson, David Lannon, Rosaleen McCarroll, Kevin Casey, Miriam Harbison, Joseph Horgan, N. Frances |
author_facet | Coleman, Sinéad A. Cunningham, Conal J. Murphy, Niamh Feaheny, Jean Robinson, David Lannon, Rosaleen McCarroll, Kevin Casey, Miriam Harbison, Joseph Horgan, N. Frances |
author_sort | Coleman, Sinéad A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Progressive resistance training can successfully target functional decline in healthy older community-dwelling adults. There are concerns about the safety and acceptance of its use in frail older populations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using progressive resistance training in an older, post-acute, inpatient setting. METHODS: A randomised controlled feasibility study was conducted. Appropriate older inpatients undergoing post-acute rehabilitation were recruited. Feasibility measures examined were safety, recruitment, outcome measurement, adherence and retention rates and satisfaction. A range of clinical measures were used to capture changes in body structure and function, activity and participation. Assessments were performed on admission to the study and six weeks later. RESULTS: A sample of 33 patients were included and randomised to the treatment group (n=16) or the control group (n=17). There were no serious adverse events, adherence rates were 63% and retention rates were 82%. While both groups improved between time 1 and 2, there were no significant differences in clinical measures between the groups. CONCLUSION: Progressive resistance training is a safe and acceptable intervention for use with this population. Further work on the effectiveness of progressive resistance training in this setting is now required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8017350 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | HYLONOME PUBLICATIONS |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80173502021-04-02 Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study Coleman, Sinéad A. Cunningham, Conal J. Murphy, Niamh Feaheny, Jean Robinson, David Lannon, Rosaleen McCarroll, Kevin Casey, Miriam Harbison, Joseph Horgan, N. Frances J Frailty Sarcopenia Falls Original Article OBJECTIVES: Progressive resistance training can successfully target functional decline in healthy older community-dwelling adults. There are concerns about the safety and acceptance of its use in frail older populations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using progressive resistance training in an older, post-acute, inpatient setting. METHODS: A randomised controlled feasibility study was conducted. Appropriate older inpatients undergoing post-acute rehabilitation were recruited. Feasibility measures examined were safety, recruitment, outcome measurement, adherence and retention rates and satisfaction. A range of clinical measures were used to capture changes in body structure and function, activity and participation. Assessments were performed on admission to the study and six weeks later. RESULTS: A sample of 33 patients were included and randomised to the treatment group (n=16) or the control group (n=17). There were no serious adverse events, adherence rates were 63% and retention rates were 82%. While both groups improved between time 1 and 2, there were no significant differences in clinical measures between the groups. CONCLUSION: Progressive resistance training is a safe and acceptable intervention for use with this population. Further work on the effectiveness of progressive resistance training in this setting is now required. HYLONOME PUBLICATIONS 2021-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8017350/ /pubmed/33817447 http://dx.doi.org/10.22540/JFSF-06-014 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Hylonome Publications http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 All published work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial - ShareAlike 4.0 International |
spellingShingle | Original Article Coleman, Sinéad A. Cunningham, Conal J. Murphy, Niamh Feaheny, Jean Robinson, David Lannon, Rosaleen McCarroll, Kevin Casey, Miriam Harbison, Joseph Horgan, N. Frances Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study |
title | Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study |
title_full | Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study |
title_fullStr | Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study |
title_full_unstemmed | Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study |
title_short | Progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: A randomised controlled feasibility study |
title_sort | progressive resistance training in a post-acute, older, inpatient setting: a randomised controlled feasibility study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8017350/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33817447 http://dx.doi.org/10.22540/JFSF-06-014 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT colemansineada progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT cunninghamconalj progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT murphyniamh progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT feahenyjean progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT robinsondavid progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT lannonrosaleen progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT mccarrollkevin progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT caseymiriam progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT harbisonjoseph progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy AT horgannfrances progressiveresistancetraininginapostacuteolderinpatientsettingarandomisedcontrolledfeasibilitystudy |