Population-based interventions for preventing falls and fall-related injuries in older people.

BACKGROUND: Around one-third of older adults aged 65 years or older who live in the community fall each year. Interventions to prevent falls can be designed to target the whole community, rather than selected individuals. These population-level interventions may be facilitated by different healthcare, social care, and community-level agencies. They aim to tackle the determinants that lead to risk of falling in older people, and include components such as community-wide polices for vitamin D supplementation for older adults, reducing fall hazards in the community or people's homes, or providing public health information or implementation of public health programmes that reduce fall risk (e.g. low-cost or free gym membership for older adults to encourage increased physical activity). OBJECTIVES: To review and synthesise the current evidence on the effects of population-based interventions for preventing falls and fall-related injuries in older people. We defined population-based interventions as community-wide initiatives to change the underlying societal, cultural, or environmental conditions increasing the risk of falling. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in December 2020, and conducted a top-up search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in January 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, trials with stepped-wedge designs, and controlled non-randomised studies evaluating population-level interventions for preventing falls and fall-related injuries in adults ≥ 60 years of age. Population-based interventions target entire communities. We excluded studies only targeting people at high risk of falling or with specific comorbidities, or residents living in institutionalised settings. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. We prioritised seven outcomes: rate of falls, number of fallers, number of people experiencing one or more fall-related injuries, number of people experiencing one or more fall-related fracture, number of people requiring hospital admission for one or more falls, adverse events, and economic analysis of interventions. Other outcomes of interest were: number of people experiencing one or more falls requiring medical attention, health-related quality of life, fall-related mortality, and concerns about falling. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine studies: two cluster RCTs and seven non-randomised trials (of which five were controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs), and two were controlled interrupted time series (CITS)). The numbers of older adults in intervention and control regions ranged from 1200 to 137,000 older residents in seven studies. The other two studies reported only total population size rather than numbers of older adults (67,300 and 172,500 residents). Most studies used hospital record systems to collect outcome data, but three only used questionnaire data in a random sample of residents; one study used both methods of data collection. The studies lasted between 14 months and eight years. We used Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) taxonomy to classify the types of interventions. All studies evaluated multicomponent falls prevention interventions. One study (n = 4542) also included a medication and nutrition intervention. We did not pool data owing to lack of consistency in study designs. Medication or nutrition Older people in the intervention area were offered free-of-charge daily supplements of calcium carbonate and vitamin D3. Although female residents exposed to this falls prevention programme had fewer fall-related hospital admissions (with no evidence of a difference for male residents) compared to a control area, we were unsure of this finding because the certainty of evidence was very low. This cluster RCT included high and unclear risks of bias in several domains, and we could not determine levels of imprecision in the effect estimate reported by study authors. Because this evidence is of very low certainty, we have not included quantitative results here. This study reported none of our other review outcomes. Multicomponent interventions Types of interventions included components of exercise, environment modification (home; community; public spaces), staff training, and knowledge and education. Studies included some or all of these components in their programme design. The effectiveness of multicomponent falls prevention interventions for all reported outcomes is uncertain. The two cluster RCTs included high or unclear risk of bias, and we had no reasons to upgrade the certainty of evidence from the non-randomised trial designs (which started as low-certainty evidence). We also noted possible imprecision in some effect estimates and inconsistent findings between studies. Given the very low-certainty evidence for all outcomes, we have not reported quantitative findings here. One cluster RCT reported lower rates of falls in the intervention area than the control area, with fewer people in the intervention area having one or more falls and fall-related injuries, but with little or no difference in the number of people having one or more fall-related fractures. In another cluster RCT (a multi-arm study), study authors reported no evidence of a difference in the number of female or male residents with falls leading to hospital admission after either a multicomponent intervention ("environmental and health programme") or a combination of this programme and the calcium and vitamin D3 programme (above). One CBA reported no difference in rate of falls between intervention and control group areas, and another CBA reported no difference in rate of falls inside or outside the home. Two CBAs found no evidence of a difference in the number of fallers, and another CBA found no evidence of a difference in fall-related injuries. One CITS found no evidence of a difference in the number of people having one or more fall-related fractures. No studies reported adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the very low-certainty evidence, we are unsure whether population-based multicomponent or nutrition and medication interventions are effective at reducing falls and fall-related injuries in older adults. Methodologically robust cluster RCTs with sufficiently large communities and numbers of clusters are needed. Establishing a rate of sampling for population-based studies would help in determining the size of communities to include. Interventions should be described in detail to allow investigation of effectiveness of individual components of multicomponent interventions; using the ProFaNE taxonomy for this would improve consistency between studies.

A peer-volunteer led active ageing programme to prevent decline in physical function in older people at risk of mobility disability (Active, Connected, Engaged [ACE]): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Active Connected Engaged [ACE] study is a multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled trial [RCT] with an internal pilot phase. The ACE study incorporates a multi-level mixed methods process evaluation including a systems mapping approach and an economic evaluation. ACE aims to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a peer-volunteer led active ageing intervention designed to support older adults at risk of mobility disability to become more physically and socially active within their communities and to reduce or reverse, the progression of functional limitations associated with ageing. METHODS/DESIGN: Community-dwelling, older adults aged 65 years and older (n = 515), at risk of mobility disability due to reduced lower limb physical functioning (Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) score of 4-9 inclusive) will be recruited. Participants will be randomised to receive either a minimal control intervention or ACE, a 6-month programme underpinned by behaviour change theory, whereby peer volunteers are paired with participants and offer them individually tailored support to engage them in local physical and social activities to improve lower limb mobility and increase their physical activity. Outcome data will be collected at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months. The primary outcome analysis (difference in SPPB score at 18 months) will be undertaken blinded to group allocation. Primary comparative analyses will be on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis with due emphasis placed on confidence intervals. DISCUSSION: ACE is the largest, pragmatic, community-based randomised controlled trial in the UK to target this high-risk segment of the older population by mobilising community resources (peer volunteers). A programme that can successfully engage this population in sufficient activity to improve strength, coordination, balance and social connections would have a major impact on sustaining health and independence. ACE is also the first study of its kind to conduct a full economic and comprehensive process evaluation of this type of community-based intervention. If effective and cost-effective, the ACE intervention has strong potential to be implemented widely in the UK and elsewhere. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN17660493. Registered on 30 September 2021. Trial Sponsor: University of Birmingham, Contact: Dr Birgit Whitman, Head of Research Governance and Integrity; Email: researchgovernance@contacts.bham.ac.uk. Protocol Version 5 22/07/22.

Digital interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness in older adults: An evidence and gap map.

Background: Social isolation and loneliness are more common in older adults and are associated with a serious impact on their well-being, mental health, physical health, and longevity. They are a public health concern highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, hence the need for digital technology tools to enable remotely delivered interventions to alleviate the impact of social isolation and loneliness during the COVID-19 restrictions. Objectives: To map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings. Search Methods: We searched the following databases from inception to May 16, 2021, with no language restrictions. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, Web of Science via Clarivate, ProQuest (all databases), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS) via ProQuest, EBSCO (all databases except CINAHL), Global Index Medicus, and Epistemonikos. Selection Criteria: Titles and abstracts and full text of potentially eligible articles were independently screened in duplicate following the eligibility criteria. Data Collection and Analysis: We developed and pilot tested a data extraction code set in Eppi-Reviewer and data were individually extracted and coded based on an intervention-outcome framework which was also used to define the dimensions of the evidence and gap map. Main Results: We included 200 articles (103 primary studies and 97 systematic reviews) that assessed the effects of digital interventions to reduce social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults. Most of the systematic reviews (72%) were classified as critically low quality, only 2% as high quality and 25% were published since the COVID-19 pandemic. The evidence is unevenly distributed with clusters predominantly in high-income countries and none in low-income countries. The most common interventions identified are digital interventions to enhance social interactions with family and friends and the community via videoconferencing and telephone calls. Digital interventions to enhance social support, particularly socially assistive robots, and virtual pets were also common. Most interventions focused on reducing loneliness and depression and improving quality of life of older adults. Major gaps were identified in community level outcomes and process indicators. No included studies or reviews assessed affordability or digital divide although the value of accessibility and barriers caused by digital divide were discussed in three primary studies and three reviews. Adverse effects were reported in only two studies and six reviews. No study or review included participants from the LGBTQIA2S+ community and only one study restricted participants to 80 years and older. Very few described how at-risk populations were recruited or conducted any equity analysis to assess differences in effects for populations experiencing inequities across PROGRESS-Plus categories. Authors' Conclusions: The restrictions placed on people during the pandemic have shone a spotlight onto social isolation and loneliness, particularly for older adults. This evidence and gap map shows available evidence on the effectiveness of digital interventions for reducing social isolation or loneliness in older adults. Although the evidence is relatively large and recent, it is unevenly distributed and there is need for more high-quality research. This map can guide researchers and funders to consider areas of major gaps as priorities for further research.

What matters to people with multiple long-term conditions and their carers?

BACKGROUND: The number of people living with multiple long-term conditions is increasing worldwide. This presents challenges for health and care systems, which must adapt to meet the needs of this population. This study drew on existing data to understand what matters to people living with multiple long-term conditions and identify priorities for future research. METHODS: Two studies were conducted. (1) A secondary thematic analysis of interview, survey and workshop data collected from the 2017 James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership for Older People with Multiple Conditions, and patient and public involvement workshops; (2) a review of ongoing research and published research priorities, relating to older people (80+) living with multiple long-term conditions. FINDINGS: Older people with multiple long-term conditions identified a number of key concerns: access to care, support for both the patient and their carer, physical and mental health and well-being and identifying opportunities for early prevention. The review identified no published research priorities or ongoing research focusing specifically on populations aged over 80 years with multiple long-term conditions. CONCLUSION: Older people living with multiple long-term conditions experience care that is inadequate for their needs. A holistic approach to care that extends beyond treating single conditions will ensure wide-ranging needs are met. As multimorbidity rises worldwide, this is a critical message for practitioners across health and care settings. We also recommend key areas that should be given greater focus in future research and policy to inform effective and meaningful forms of support for people living with multiple long-term conditions.

Adherence to mHealth and Paper-Based Versions of Lifestyle-Integrated Functional Exercise: A Secondary Analysis of Data From the PreventIT Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

The European Commission Horizon 2020 project-PreventIT-evaluated two approaches to delivering Lifestyle-Integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) programs for maintaining older adults' physical function: the paper-based adapted LiFE and mobile health device delivered enhanced LiFE. A self-reported method was used to measure users' monthly adherence over 12 months. This analysis aimed to explore young seniors' adherence patterns between enhanced LiFE and adapted LiFE groups. Results showed that adherence level decreased with time in both groups. The enhanced LiFE group had slightly higher adherence than the adapted LiFE group during most of the 12 months. However, the overall adherence levels were not significantly different during either intervention or follow-up periods. Monthly self-reported adherence measurement can help to understand users' adherence comprehensively. The comparable adherence levels between both groups indicate mobile health could be an alternative to delivering home-based physical activity for young seniors. However, this feasibility study was not powered to detect differences between groups.

Impact of adherence to a lifestyle-integrated programme on physical function and behavioural complexity in young older adults at risk of functional decline: a multicentre RCT secondary analysis.

CONTEXT: Long-term adherence to physical activity (PA) interventions is challenging. The Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise programmes were adapted Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (aLiFE) to include more challenging activities and a behavioural change framework, and then enhanced Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (eLiFE) to be delivered using smartphones and smartwatches. OBJECTIVES: To (1) compare adherence measures, (2) identify determinants of adherence and (3) assess the impact on outcome measures of a lifestyle-integrated programme. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicentre, feasibility randomised controlled trial including participants aged 61-70 years conducted in three European cities. INTERVENTIONS: Six-month trainer-supported aLiFE or eLiFE compared with a control group, which received written PA advice. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reporting adherence per month using a single question and after 6-month intervention using the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS, score range 6-24). Treatment outcomes included function and disability scores (measured using the Late-Life Function and Disability Index) and sensor-derived physical behaviour complexity measure. Determinants of adherence (EARS score) were identified using linear multivariate analysis. Linear regression estimated the association of adherence on treatment outcome. RESULTS: We included 120 participants randomised to the intervention groups (aLiFE/eLiFE) (66.3±2.3 years, 53% women). The 106 participants reassessed after 6 months had a mean EARS score of 16.0±5.1. Better adherence was associated with lower number of medications taken, lower depression and lower risk of functional decline. We estimated adherence to significantly increase basic lower extremity function by 1.3 points (p<0.0001), advanced lower extremity function by 1.0 point (p<0.0001) and behavioural complexity by 0.008 per 1.0 point higher EARS score (F(3,91)=3.55, p=0.017) regardless of group allocation. CONCLUSION: PA adherence was associated with better lower extremity function and physical behavioural complexity. Barriers to adherence should be addressed preintervention to enhance intervention efficacy. Further research is needed to unravel the impact of behaviour change techniques embedded into technology-delivered activity interventions on adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03065088.

Measurement of Adherence to mHealth Physical Activity Interventions and Exploration of the Factors That Affect the Adherence: Scoping Review and Proposed Framework.

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) is widely used as an innovative approach to delivering physical activity (PA) programs. Users' adherence to mHealth programs is important to ensure the effectiveness of mHealth-based programs. OBJECTIVE: Our primary aim was to review the literature on the methods used to assess adherence, factors that could affect users' adherence, and the investigation of the association between adherence and health outcomes. Our secondary aim was to develop a framework to understand the role of adherence in influencing the effectiveness of mHealth PA programs. METHODS: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases were searched to identify studies that evaluated the use of mHealth to promote PA in adults aged ≥18 years. We used critical interpretive synthesis methods to summarize the data collected. RESULTS: In total, 54 papers were included in this review. We identified 31 specific adherence measurement methods, which were summarized into 8 indicators; these indicators were mapped to 4 dimensions: length, breadth, depth, and interaction. Users' characteristics (5 factors), technology-related factors (12 factors), and contextual factors (1 factor) were reported to have impacts on adherence. The included studies reveal that adherence is significantly associated with intervention outcomes, including health behaviors, psychological indicators, and clinical indicators. A framework was developed based on these review findings. CONCLUSIONS: This study developed an adherence framework linking together the adherence predictors, comprehensive adherence assessment, and clinical effectiveness. This framework could provide evidence for measuring adherence comprehensively and guide further studies on adherence to mHealth-based PA interventions. Future research should validate the utility of this proposed framework.

PROTOCOL: Digital interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness in older adults: An evidence and gap map.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows: the aim is to map available evidence on the effects of digital interventions to mitigate social isolation and/or loneliness in older adults in all settings except hospital settings.

Effects of Digital Technologies on Older People's Access to Health and Social Care: Umbrella Review.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic prompted the rapid implementation of new and existing digital technologies to facilitate access to health and care services during physical distancing. Older people may be disadvantaged in that regard if they are unable to use or have access to smartphones, tablets, computers, or other technologies. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we synthesized evidence on the impact of digital technologies on older adults' access to health and social services. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews published from January 2000 to October 2019 using comprehensive searches of 6 databases. We looked for reviews in a population of adults aged ≥65 years in any setting, reporting outcomes related to the impact of technologies on access to health and social care services. RESULTS: A total of 7 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, providing data from 77 randomized controlled trials and 50 observational studies. All of them synthesized findings from low-quality primary studies, 2 of which used robust review methods. Most of the reviews focused on digital technologies to facilitate remote delivery of care, including consultations and therapy. No studies examined technologies used for first contact access to care, such as online appointment scheduling. Overall, we found no reviews of technology to facilitate first contact access to health and social care such as online appointment booking systems for older populations. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of digital technologies on equitable access to services for older people is unclear. Research is urgently needed in order to understand the positive and negative consequences of digital technologies on health care access and to identify the groups most vulnerable to exclusion.

Identifying older adults with frailty approaching end-of-life: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People with frailty may have specific needs for end-of-life care, but there is no consensus on how to identify these people in a timely way, or whether they will benefit from intervention. AIM: To synthesise evidence on identification of older people with frailty approaching end-of-life, and whether associated intervention improves outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42020462624). DATA SOURCES: Six databases were searched, with no date restrictions, for articles reporting prognostic or intervention studies. Key inclusion criteria were adults aged 65 and over, identified as frail via an established measure. End-of-life was defined as the final 12 months. Key exclusion criteria were proxy definitions of frailty, or studies involving people with cancer, even if also frail. RESULTS: Three articles met the inclusion criteria. Strongest evidence came from one study in English primary care, which showed distinct trajectories in electronic Frailty Index scores in the last 12 months of life, associated with increased risk of death. We found no studies evaluating established clinical tools (e.g. Gold Standards Framework) with existing frail populations. We found no intervention studies; the literature on advance care planning with people with frailty has relied on proxy definitions of frailty. CONCLUSION: Clear implications for policy and practice are hindered by the lack of studies using an established approach to assessing frailty. Future end-of-life research needs to use explicit approaches to the measurement and reporting of frailty, and address the evidence gap on interventions. A focus on models of care that incorporate a palliative approach is essential.

Measuring frailty in younger populations: a rapid review of evidence.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is typically assessed in older populations. Identifying frailty in adults aged under 60 years may also have value, if it supports the delivery of timely care. We sought to identify how frailty is measured in younger populations, including evidence of the impact on patient outcomes and care. DESIGN: A rapid review of primary studies was conducted. DATA SOURCES: Four databases, three sources of grey literature and reference lists of systematic reviews were searched in March 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible studies measured frailty in populations aged under 60 years using experimental or observational designs, published after 2000 in English. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Records were screened against review criteria. Study data were extracted with 20% of records checked for accuracy by a second researcher. Data were synthesised using a narrative approach. RESULTS: We identified 268 studies that measured frailty in samples that included people aged under 60 years. Of these, 85 studies reported evidence about measure validity. No measures were identified that were designed and validated to identify frailty exclusively in younger groups. However, in populations that included people aged over and under 60 years, cumulative deficit frailty indices, phenotype measures, the FRAIL Scale, the Liver Frailty Index and the Short Physical Performance Battery all demonstrated predictive validity for mortality and/or hospital admission. Evidence of criterion validity was rare. The extent to which measures possess validity across the younger adult age (18-59 years) spectrum was unclear. There was no evidence about the impact of measuring frailty in younger populations on patient outcomes and care. CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence suggests that frailty measures have predictive validity in younger populations. Further research is needed to clarify the validity of measures across the adult age spectrum, and explore the utility of measuring frailty in younger groups.

How Do Decision Makers and Service Providers Experience Participatory Approaches to Developing and Implementing Physical Activity Interventions with Older Adults? A Thematic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity has numerous health and well-being benefits for older adults, but many older adults are inactive. Interventions designed to increase physical activity in older adults have typically only produced small effects and have not achieved long-term changes. There is increasing interest in participatory approaches to promoting physical activity, such as co-production, co-design and place-based approaches, but they have typically involved researchers as participants. This study aimed to understand the experiences of decision-makers and service developers with the introduction of such participatory approaches when developing new physical activity programmes outside of a research setting. METHODS: Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 individuals who were involved in commissioning or developing the Greater Manchester Active Ageing Programme. This programme involved funding eight local authorities within Greater Manchester, England, to produce physical activity projects for older adults, involving participatory approaches. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted, structured using the Framework approach. RESULTS: Interviewees identified important benefits of the participatory approaches. The increased involvement of older adults led to older adults contributing valuable ideas, becoming involved in and taking ownership of projects. Interviewees identified the need to move away from traditional emphases on increasing physical activity to improve health, towards focussing on social and fun elements. The accessibility of the session location and information was considered important. Challenges were also identified. In particular, it was recognised that the new approaches require significant time investment to do well, as trusting relationships with older adults and partner organisations need to be developed. Ensuring the sustainability of projects in the context of short-term funding cycles was a concern. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating participatory approaches was perceived to yield important benefits. Interviewees highlighted that to ensure success, sufficient time needs to be provided to develop good working relationships with older adults and partner organisations. They also emphasised that sufficient funding to ensure adequate staffing and the sustainability of projects is required to allow benefits to be gained. Importantly, the implementation of these approaches appears feasible across a range of local authorities.

What matters to people with multiple long-term conditions and their carers?

BACKGROUND: The number of people living with multiple long-term conditions is increasing worldwide. This presents challenges for health and care systems, which must adapt to meet the needs of this population. This study drew on existing data to understand what matters to people living with multiple long-term conditions and identify priorities for future research. METHODS: Two studies were conducted. (1) A secondary thematic analysis of interview, survey and workshop data collected from the 2017 James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership for Older People with Multiple Conditions, and patient and public involvement workshops; (2) a review of ongoing research and published research priorities, relating to older people (80+) living with multiple long-term conditions. FINDINGS: Older people with multiple long-term conditions identified a number of key concerns: access to care, support for both the patient and their carer, physical and mental health and well-being and identifying opportunities for early prevention. The review identified no published research priorities or ongoing research focusing specifically on populations aged over 80 years with multiple long-term conditions. CONCLUSION: Older people living with multiple long-term conditions experience care that is inadequate for their needs. A holistic approach to care that extends beyond treating single conditions will ensure wide-ranging needs are met. As multimorbidity rises worldwide, this is a critical message for practitioners across health and care settings. We also recommend key areas that should be given greater focus in future research and policy to inform effective and meaningful forms of support for people living with multiple long-term conditions.

Map the apps: a rapid review of digital approaches to support the engagement of older adults in strength and balance exercises.

BACKGROUND: Exercise interventions, particularly those targeting strength and balance, are effective in preventing falls in older people. Activity levels are generally below recommended levels and reduce with age. There is concern that exercise levels may be further reduced in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital approaches may offer a means for older people to engage in strength and balance exercises independently in their own homes. The objective of this review was to identify and evaluate existing apps and websites to support independent engagement in strength and balance exercises by older people. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of apps and websites, following PRISMA guidelines. We searched for available apps in the Android and iOS app stores, and performed a database search (MEDLINE and EMBASE) for apps in development. We searched for websites using the Google search engine. Apps and websites were evaluated in terms of existing evidence for effectiveness, use of behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and quality. RESULTS: We evaluated 13 apps and 24 websites on the basis of our selection criteria. Considering the evidence-base, quality and BCT scores, four apps and six websites are recommended for use by older people who wish to engage in exercise independently in their own homes. No apps or websites have been to RCT evaluation at the time of review. CONCLUSIONS: Apps and websites have the potential to provide a convenient, cost-effective, and accessible means for many older adults to engage in strength and balance training and reduce falls risk.

Client, caregiver, volunteer, and therapist views on a voluntary supported group exercise programme for older adults with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Existing group exercise programmes, or other services offered to maintain physical activity levels, are typically not developed specifically for older adults with dementia. The aim of this study was to gain knowledge about perceptions of a newly developed volunteer supported group exercise programme for older adults with dementia, and any barriers that may have affected participation and compliance. METHODS: Seven (six face-to-face and one by email) interviews were conducted with (i) older adults and volunteers participating in a pilot 12-week group exercise programme, (ii) caregivers, and (iii) therapists leading the group sessions. Interview transcriptions were systemised by use of NVivo 8 and analysed by use of Systematic Text Condensation method. RESULTS: The theme "building relationships" represents the reason why attending this group was important for the participants. The findings suggest that how we organize exercise groups is important, with some sort of extra support, to ensure that persons will begin and continue to participate in new activities outside their homes. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that it is possible to involve home-dwelling persons with cognitive decline and dementia in group exercise sessions. The role of building relationships was the major factor for successful participation. Providing support and ensuring motivation for persons attending the group outside their homes was essential, both for them and their caregivers. Service providers should not underestimate the importance of building relationships between persons involved in service offers.

Digital Technology to Deliver a Lifestyle-Integrated Exercise Intervention in Young Seniors-The PreventIT Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Behavioral change is the key to alter individuals' lifestyle from sedentary to active. The aim was to assess the feasibility of delivering a Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise programme and evaluate the delivery of the intervention by use of digital technology (eLiFE) to prevent functional decline in 61-70 year-old adults. Methods: This multicentre, feasibility randomized controlled trial was run in three countries (Norway, Germany, and the Netherlands). Out of 7,500 potential participants, 926 seniors (12%) were screened and 180 participants randomized to eLiFE (n = 61), aLiFE (n = 59), and control group (n = 60). eLiFE participants used an application on smartphones and smartwatches while aLiFE participants used traditional paper-based versions of the same lifestyle-integrated exercise intervention. Participants were followed for 12 months, with assessments at baseline, after a 6 month active trainer-supported intervention, and after a further 6 months of unsupervised continuation of the programme. Results: At 6 months, 87% of participants completed post-test, and 77% completed the final assessment at 12 months. Participants were willing to be part of the programme, with compliance and reported adherence relatively high. Despite small errors during start-up in the technological component, intervention delivery by use of technology appeared acceptable. No serious adverse events were related to the interventions. All groups improved regarding clinical outcomes over time, and complexity metrics show potential as outcome measure in young seniors. Conclusion: This feasibility RCT provides evidence that an ICT-based lifestyle-integrated exercise intervention, focusing on behavioral change, is feasible and safe for young seniors. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03065088. Registered on 14 February 2017.

Attitudes Towards Adapted Lifestyle-Integrated Functional Exercise Developed for 60-70-Year-Olds: Perceptions of Participants and Trainers.

BACKGROUND: Time commitments, limited access, or unwillingness to join a group are some of the many reasons for low adherence to structured exercise in older adults. A promising alternative approach is integrating exercise into daily routines. OBJECTIVE: This study tested whether an adapted Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (aLiFE) programme is suitable for adults aged 60-70 years. METHODS: The aLiFE approach was evaluated by interviews and focus-groups with participants and trainers following 4-week pre-post intervention pilot study. For data analyses, Framework Approach was used. Coding was managed using NVivo, and subsequently organised into overarching themes. RESULTS: Twenty women and 11 men (mean age 66.4 ± 2.7 years) and 6 trainers (30.0 ± 6.2 years; 5 women) participated. Both participants and trainers were positive about the programme. Participants understood the concept of integrating balance, strength and physical activities into daily lives and valued the individual tailoring in the programme, the preventive approach, and the support of trainers. Trainers valued the flexible approach and peer support between trainers. However, both participants and trainers disliked the extensive study paperwork and reported some challenges to integrate activities into daily routines during the compressed intervention: busy and varied lifestyles, embarrassment performing activities in public, pain, difficulty of specific activities. Participants noted habitualisation of some activities within the short intervention period, even without continuous self-monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: aLiFE is a highly acceptable intervention amongst adults aged 60-70 years. Trainers are especially relevant as motivators and support providers. The effectiveness of the aLiFE approach should be tested in a randomised controlled trial.

The Adapted Lifestyle-Integrated Functional Exercise Program for Preventing Functional Decline in Young Seniors: Development and Initial Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) program is an intervention integrating balance and strength activities into daily life, effective at reducing falls in at-risk people ≥70 years. There is potential for LiFE to be adapted to young seniors in order to prevent age-related functional decline. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to (1) develop an intervention by adapting Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (aLiFE) to be more challenging and suitable for preventing functional decline in young seniors in their 60s and (2) perform an initial feasibility evaluation of the program. Pre-post changes in balance, mobility, and physical activity (PA) were also explored. METHODS: Based on a conceptual framework, a multidisciplinary expert group developed an initial aLiFE version, including activities for improving strength, neuromotor performances, and PA. Proof-of-concept was evaluated in a 4-week pre-post intervention study measuring (1) feasibility including adherence, frequency of practice, adverse events, acceptability (i.e., perceived helpfulness, adaptability, level of difficulty of single activities), and safety, and (2) changes in balance/mobility (Community Balance and Mobility Scale) and PA (1 week activity monitoring). The program was refined based on the study results. RESULTS: To test the initial aLiFE version, 31 young seniors were enrolled and 30 completed the study (mean age 66.4 ± 2.7 years, 60% women). Of a maximum possible 16 activities, participants implemented on average 12.1 ± 1.8 activities during the intervention, corresponding to mean adherence of 76%. Implemented activities were practiced 3.6-6.1 days/week and 1.8-7.8 times/day, depending on the activity type. One noninjurious fall occurred during practice, although the participant continued the intervention. The majority found the activities helpful, adaptable to individual lifestyle, appropriately difficult, and safe. CMBS score increased with medium effect size (d = 0.72, p = 0.001). Increase in daily walking time (d = 0.36) and decrease in sedentary time (d = -0.10) were nonsignificant. Refinements included further increasing the task challenge of some strength activities and defining the most preferred activities in the trainer's manual to facilitate uptake of the program. CONCLUSION: aLiFE has the potential to engage young seniors in regular lifestyle-integrated activities. Effectiveness needs to be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

My husband is not ill; he has memory loss - caregivers´ perspectives on health care services for persons with dementia.

BACKGROUND: To explore informal caregivers' perspectives and perceived needs related to health care services/activities for older adults with dementia, in order to understand barriers and facilitators to participation. The study represents a first step, and explores challenges to overcome, in order to design new activities and services adapted to older adults with dementia. METHODS: We used a qualitative approach where eight caregivers of people with a dementia diagnosis were included. We recruited participants from a counselling service centre, for home dwelling people with dementia and their families, in a Norwegian municipality. We transcribed data from two focus group interviews and completed analyses by use of Systematic Text Condensation method. RESULTS: The findings indicate that current health care services for people with dementia do not meet the needs of either the people with dementia or their caregivers. The few activities/services offered are characterised by passivity and lack of individual and personalised care. Existing health care services and new activities should consider each individual's resources, interests, and physical function to ensure that both people with dementia and their caregivers want to accept support. CONCLUSIONS: To develop health care services and activities for people with dementia, participation and involvement from both people with dementia and their caregivers is necessary. People with dementia are more than their diagnosis. Future health care providers have to widen their focus and consider the individual person with dementia.

Protocol for the PreventIT feasibility randomised controlled trial of a lifestyle-integrated exercise intervention in young older adults.

INTRODUCTION: The European population is rapidly ageing. In order to handle substantial future challenges in the healthcare system, we need to shift focus from treatment towards health promotion. The PreventIT project has adapted the Lifestyle-integrated Exercise (LiFE) programme and developed an intervention for healthy young older adults at risk of accelerated functional decline. The intervention targets balance, muscle strength and physical activity, and is delivered either via a smartphone application (enhanced LiFE, eLiFE) or by use of paper manuals (adapted LiFE, aLiFE). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PreventIT study is a multicentre, three-armed feasibility randomised controlled trial, comparing eLiFE and aLiFE against a control group that receives international guidelines of physical activity. It is performed in three European cities in Norway, Germany, and The Netherlands. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility and usability of the interventions, and to assess changes in daily life function as measured by the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument scale and a physical behaviour complexity metric. Participants are assessed at baseline, after the 6 months intervention period and at 1 year after randomisation. Men and women between 61 and 70 years of age are randomly drawn from regional registries and respondents screened for risk of functional decline to recruit and randomise 180 participants (60 participants per study arm). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received at all three trial sites. Baseline results are intended to be published by late 2018, with final study findings expected in early 2019. Subgroup and further in-depth analyses will subsequently be published. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03065088; Pre-results.