ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess whether the superior cost-effectiveness of a personalized physical therapy approach (Coach2Move)-which was demonstrated in a previous trial compared with usual care physical therapy (UCP)-can be replicated in daily clinical practice. METHODS: A multicenter, cluster-randomized, stepped wedge trial with 4 clusters consisting of 4 physical therapist practices in the Netherlands was used to compare a personalized physical therapy approach to elicit physical activity (Coach2Move) versus care as usual. Multilevel analyses for effectiveness were conducted for the amount of physical activity (Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam Physical Activity Questionnaire) and functional mobility (Timed "Up & Go" Test) at 3, 6 (primary outcome), and 12 months' follow-up. Secondary outcomes were level of frailty (Evaluative Frailty Index for Physical Activity), perceived effect (Global Perceived Effect and Patient-Specific Complaints Questionnaires), quality of life (Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Levels [EQ-5D-5L]), and health care expenditures. RESULTS: The 292 community-dwelling older adults with mobility problems visiting physical therapists were included in either the Coach2Move (n = 112; mean [SD] age = 82 [5] years; 60% female) or UCP (n = 180; mean [SD] age = 81 (6) years; 62% female) section of the trial. At baseline, Coach2Move participants were less physically active compared with UCP participants (mean difference = -198; 95% CI = -90 to -306 active minutes). At 6 months, between-group mean differences [95% CI] favored Coach2Move participants on physical activity levels (297 [83 to 512] active minutes), functional mobility (-14.2 [-21 to -8]) seconds), and frailty levels (-5 [-8 to -1] points). At 12 months, the physical activity levels of Coach2Move participants further increased, and frailty levels and secondary outcomes remained stable, whereas outcomes of UCP participants decreased. After the Coach2Move implementation strategy, physical therapists utilized significantly fewer treatment sessions compared with before the implementation (15 vs 22). Anticipated cost savings were not observed. CONCLUSION: This study replicated the results of an earlier trial and shows that Coach2Move leads to better mid- and long-term outcomes (physical activity, functional mobility, level of frailty) in fewer therapy sessions compared with UCP. Based on these and earlier findings, the implementation of Coach2Move in physical therapist practice is recommended. IMPACT: This article describes the implementation of the Coach2Move approach, a treatment strategy that has proven to be cost-effective in a previously conducted randomized controlled trial. Implementation of Coach2Move in a real-life setting allowed an evaluation of the effects in a clinically relevant population. Coach2Move has been shown to increase physical activity, improve functional mobility, and reduce frailty more effectively compared with UCP therapy and therefore has application for physical therapists working with older adults in daily clinical practice. LAY SUMMARY: Coach2Move is a new physical therapy approach for older adults. Implementation of Coach2Move in daily clinical practice can help people better outcomes over a longer period of time against similar costs compared with regular physical therapy.
Subject(s)
Frailty , Humans , Female , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Male , Quality of Life , Physical Therapy Modalities , Exercise , Aging , Cost-Benefit AnalysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Coach2Move is a personalized treatment strategy by physical therapists to elicit physical activity in community-dwelling older adults with mobility problems. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the implementation of Coach2Move compared with regular care physical therapy in daily clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTION: A multicenter cluster-randomized stepped wedge trial is being implemented in 16 physical therapist practices (4 clusters of 4 practices in 4 steps) in the Netherlands. The study aims to include 400 older adults (≥70 years) living independently with mobility problems and/or physically inactive lifestyles. The intervention group receives physical therapy conforming to the Coach2Move strategy; the usual care group receives typical physical therapist care. MEASUREMENTS: Measurements are taken at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months after the start of treatment. The primary outcomes for effectiveness are the amount of physical activity (LASA Physical Activity Questionnaire) and functional mobility (Timed Up and Go test). Trial success can be declared if at least 1 parameter improves while another does not deteriorate. Secondary outcomes are level of frailty (Evaluative Frailty Index for Physical Activity), perceived effect (Global Perceived Effect and Patient Specific Complaints questionnaire), quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L), and health care expenditures. Multilevel linear regression analyses are used to compare the outcomes between treatment groups according to an intention-to-treat approach. Alongside the trial, a mixed-methods process evaluation is performed to understand the outcomes, evaluate therapist fidelity to the strategy, and detect barriers and facilitators in implementation. LIMITATIONS: An important limitation of the study design is the inability to blind treating therapists to study allocation. DISCUSSION: The trial provides insight into the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Coach2Move strategy compared with usual care. The process evaluation provides insight into influencing factors related to outcomes and implementation.
