Cargando…

Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Physical rehabilitation (PR) interventions can improve physical function for adults with frailty; however, participant retention rates in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are unknown. Objective is to summarize participant retention rates in RCTs of PR for adults with frailty. Design i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: O’Grady, Heather K., Farley, Christopher, Takaoka, Alyson, Mayens, Elisa, Bosch, Jackie, Turkstra, Lyn, Kho, Michelle E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8961921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35346320
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06172-5
_version_ 1784677691665940480
author O’Grady, Heather K.
Farley, Christopher
Takaoka, Alyson
Mayens, Elisa
Bosch, Jackie
Turkstra, Lyn
Kho, Michelle E.
author_facet O’Grady, Heather K.
Farley, Christopher
Takaoka, Alyson
Mayens, Elisa
Bosch, Jackie
Turkstra, Lyn
Kho, Michelle E.
author_sort O’Grady, Heather K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Physical rehabilitation (PR) interventions can improve physical function for adults with frailty; however, participant retention rates in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are unknown. Objective is to summarize participant retention rates in RCTs of PR for adults with frailty. Design is a systematic review and meta-analysis (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/G6XR2). Participants are adults ≥ 18 years with frailty. Setting consists of inpatient, outpatient and community-based interventions. Intervention includes any PR intervention. METHODS: We searched 7 electronic databases from inception to April 15, 2020 for published RCTs. Our primary outcome was participant retention rate to primary outcome measurement. Secondary outcomes included retention by study group, participant retention to intervention completion, reported reasons for attrition and reported strategies for maximizing retention. We completed screening, data extraction and risk of bias (ROB) assessments independently and in duplicate. We conducted a meta-analysis, calculating retention rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using fixed or random-effects models, as appropriate. RESULTS: We included 21 RCTs, enrolling 1685 adults with frailty (median age 82.5 years (79.0, 82.2), 59.8% female (57.5, 69.8)). Twenty RCTs reported retention data, of which 90.0% (n = 18) had high ROB. The pooled participant retention rate to primary outcome measurement was 85.0% [95%CI (80.0, 90.0), I(2) = 83.9%, p < 0.05]. There were no differences by group for retention to the primary outcome [intervention 87.0% (83.0, 91.0), p < 0.05, comparator 85.0% (79.0, 90.0), p < 0.05] or in retention to intervention completion [83.0% (95.0% CI (78.0–87.0), p < 0.05]. Of the 18 studies reporting 24 reasons for attrition, 51.3% were categorized as potentially modifiable by the research team (e.g. low motivation). Only 20.0% (n = 4) of studies reported strategies for maximizing retention. CONCLUSIONS: In this review of 21 RCTs of PR, we identified acceptable rates of retention for adults with frailty. High retention in PR interventions appears to be feasible in this population; however, our results are limited by a high ROB and heterogeneity. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06172-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8961921
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89619212022-03-30 Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis O’Grady, Heather K. Farley, Christopher Takaoka, Alyson Mayens, Elisa Bosch, Jackie Turkstra, Lyn Kho, Michelle E. Trials Review BACKGROUND: Physical rehabilitation (PR) interventions can improve physical function for adults with frailty; however, participant retention rates in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are unknown. Objective is to summarize participant retention rates in RCTs of PR for adults with frailty. Design is a systematic review and meta-analysis (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/G6XR2). Participants are adults ≥ 18 years with frailty. Setting consists of inpatient, outpatient and community-based interventions. Intervention includes any PR intervention. METHODS: We searched 7 electronic databases from inception to April 15, 2020 for published RCTs. Our primary outcome was participant retention rate to primary outcome measurement. Secondary outcomes included retention by study group, participant retention to intervention completion, reported reasons for attrition and reported strategies for maximizing retention. We completed screening, data extraction and risk of bias (ROB) assessments independently and in duplicate. We conducted a meta-analysis, calculating retention rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using fixed or random-effects models, as appropriate. RESULTS: We included 21 RCTs, enrolling 1685 adults with frailty (median age 82.5 years (79.0, 82.2), 59.8% female (57.5, 69.8)). Twenty RCTs reported retention data, of which 90.0% (n = 18) had high ROB. The pooled participant retention rate to primary outcome measurement was 85.0% [95%CI (80.0, 90.0), I(2) = 83.9%, p < 0.05]. There were no differences by group for retention to the primary outcome [intervention 87.0% (83.0, 91.0), p < 0.05, comparator 85.0% (79.0, 90.0), p < 0.05] or in retention to intervention completion [83.0% (95.0% CI (78.0–87.0), p < 0.05]. Of the 18 studies reporting 24 reasons for attrition, 51.3% were categorized as potentially modifiable by the research team (e.g. low motivation). Only 20.0% (n = 4) of studies reported strategies for maximizing retention. CONCLUSIONS: In this review of 21 RCTs of PR, we identified acceptable rates of retention for adults with frailty. High retention in PR interventions appears to be feasible in this population; however, our results are limited by a high ROB and heterogeneity. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06172-5. BioMed Central 2022-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8961921/ /pubmed/35346320 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06172-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
O’Grady, Heather K.
Farley, Christopher
Takaoka, Alyson
Mayens, Elisa
Bosch, Jackie
Turkstra, Lyn
Kho, Michelle E.
Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort retention in rcts of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8961921/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35346320
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06172-5
work_keys_str_mv AT ogradyheatherk retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT farleychristopher retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT takaokaalyson retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mayenselisa retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT boschjackie retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT turkstralyn retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT khomichellee retentioninrctsofphysicalrehabilitationforadultswithfrailtyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis