RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Since multidimensional barriers challenge nursing homes, a socio-ecological approach is needed for physical activity promotion in this setting. So far, little is known about how such an approach can be transferred into the successful development and implementation of PA-promoting actions together with stakeholders on-site. We aimed to investigate the actions and dimensions of PA-promoting actions and their sustainable implementation. To contribute to closing this gap, we present a 10-step program for co-developing and co-evaluating PA-promoting actions in nursing homes through an integrated counselling approach. METHODS: We used a multiple case study approach that built upon manifold data sources, collected in 7 nursing homes over 3 years between 2021 and 2023. We collected fieldnotes and photologs from 14 future workshops (2 per home); 7 evaluation workshops (1 per home); 36 individual counsellings (2 sessions per resident), as well as 87 implementation protocols (action type and frequency), 11 evaluation questionnaires (changes among resources, cooperations, and collaborations); 7 goal attainment scales and 18 individual activity schedules. In addition, we retrieved and documented progress information at regular intervals by phone or email. RESULTS: With staff, residents, relatives, and volunteers, we co-developed 112 ideas for PA promotion; from which 54 ideas were implemented and integrated into everyday life, differentiated into "activities of daily living," "structured activities," and "activity-friendly environments."; 18 residents in 4 homes participated in individual counselling to develop individual activity schedules. Eighteen actions were rated as "(much) more successful than expected"; 10 "(much) worse than expected," and 23 "as successful as expected." Three actions were not evaluated. DISCUSSION: The participatory integrated counselling approach led to home-specific actions and promoted implementation into everyday life. The number and dimensions of actions implemented largely depended on the mission and vision of the respective home. The lack of staff could partially be compensated for by involving neighbourhoods, volunteers, and community organisations, such as local clubs. CONCLUSION: To effectively promote PA in nursing homes, a tailored approach considering structural conditions, locations, volunteer engagement, and organisational visions is essential. Long-lasting partnerships and low-threshold opportunities prove promising. Future research should delve into structural-level change processes and outcomes in this context.
Assuntos
Atividades Cotidianas , Casas de Saúde , Humanos , Exercício Físico , Relações Interpessoais , AlemanhaRESUMO
Little is known about physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) among nursing home residents although PA is known as a health promoter. This study examined PA, SB, and their predictors among nursing home residents (n = 63). Dependent variables were accelerometry-based PA and SB. Predictor variables included in a path analysis were age, sex, body mass index, Barthel Index, cognitive status (Mini-Mental State Examination), physical performance (hand grip strength and habitual walking speed), and well-being (World Health Organization-5 well-being index). PA was very low (M steps per day = 2,433) and SB was high (M percentage of sedentary time = 89.4%). PA was significantly predicted by age (ß = -0.27, p = .008), body mass index (ß = -0.29, p = .002), Barthel Index (ß = 0.24, p = .040), and hand grip strength (ß = 0.30, p = .048). SB was significantly predicted by body mass index (ß = 0.27, p = .008) and Barthel Index (ß = -0.30, p = .012). Results might be helpful for everyday practice to identify individuals at high risk for low PA and high SB.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Residents in nursing homes show a high prevalence of the musculoskeletal syndrome sarcopenia and tend not to achieve current physical activity recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify differences in physical activity and sedentary behavior of sarcopenic residents compared with nonsarcopenic and presarcopenic residents. METHODS: Sarcopenia assessment was performed among 63 nursing home residents in Baden-Wuerttemberg (D) using the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 specifications. Structured activity sessions (per week), accelerometer-based physical activity (steps/day), and sedentary behavior (percentual/day) were examined. The group comparisons were determined with Kruskal-Wallis tests and Dunn-Bonferroni post hoc tests. RESULTS: Significant differences were found for number of steps (pâ¯= 0.005) and percentual sedentary behavior (pâ¯= 0.019). Moreover, steps per day presented significant results in group comparison for no sarcopenia (2824.4 [423-14275]) with probable sarcopenia (1703.9 [118-5663]) and confirmed/severe sarcopenia (1571.2 [240-2392]) (both pâ¯= 0.022; |r|â¯= 0.34). Sedentary behavior demonstrated significant differences in groups with no sarcopenia (87.9% [69.1-94.3]) and with probable sarcopenia (91.7% [80.4-9835]) (pâ¯= 0.018; |r|â¯= 0.35). CONCLUSION: Nonsarcopenic residents demonstrated a higher number of steps and lower sedentary behavior compared with presarcopenic and sarcopenic residents. Increasing steps, reducing sedentary behavior and promoting activities of daily living can contribute to the prevention and treatment of sarcopenia in the nursing home setting.