Older adult perceptions of participation in group- and home-based falls prevention exercise
- Robins, Lauren, Hill, Kylie, Day, Lesley, Clemson, Lindy, Finch, Caroline, Haines, Terry
- Authors: Robins, Lauren , Hill, Kylie , Day, Lesley , Clemson, Lindy , Finch, Caroline , Haines, Terry
- Date: 2016
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Aging and Physical Activity Vol. 24, no. 3 (2016), p. 350-362
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: This paper describes why older adults begin, continue, and discontinue group-and home-based falls prevention exercise and benefits and barriers to participation. Telephone surveys were used to collect data for 394 respondents. Most respondents reported not participating in group-(66%) or home-based (78%) falls prevention exercise recently. Reasons for starting group-based falls prevention exercise include health benefits (23-39%), health professional recommendation (13-19%), and social interaction (4-16%). They discontinued because the program finished (44%) or due to poor health (20%). Commonly reported benefits were social interaction (41-67%) and health (15-31%). Disliking groups was the main barrier (2-14%). Home-based falls prevention exercise was started for rehabilitation (46-63%) or upon health professional recommendation (22-48%) and stopped due to recovery (30%). Improvement in health (18-46%) was the main benefit. These findings could assist health professionals in prescribing group-based falls prevention exercise by considering characteristics of older adults who perceive social interaction to be beneficial.
The association between physical activity and social isolation in community-dwelling older adults
- Robins, Lauren, Hill, Keith, Finch, Caroline, Clemson, Lindy, Haines, Terry
- Authors: Robins, Lauren , Hill, Keith , Finch, Caroline , Clemson, Lindy , Haines, Terry
- Date: 2018
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Aging and Mental Health Vol. 22, no. 2 (2018), p. 175-182
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives: Social isolation is an increasing concern in older community-dwelling adults. There is growing need to determine effective interventions addressing social isolation. This study aimed to determine whether a relationship exists between physical activity (recreational and/or household-based) and social isolation. An examination was conducted for whether group- or home-based falls prevention exercise was associated with social isolation. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of telephone survey data was used to investigate relationships between physical activity, health, age, gender, living arrangements, ethnicity and participation in group- or home-based falls prevention exercise on social isolation. Univariable and multivariable ordered logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results: Factors found to be significantly associated with reduced social isolation in multivariable analysis included living with a partner/spouse, reporting better general health, higher levels of household-based physical activity (OR = 1.03, CI = 1.01–1.05) and feeling less downhearted/depressed. Being more socially isolated was associated with symptoms of depression and a diagnosis of congestive heart failure (pseudo R2 = 0.104). Discussion: Findings suggest that household-based physical activity is related to social isolation in community-dwelling older adults. Further research is required to determine the nature of this relationship and to investigate the impact of group physical activity interventions on social isolation.
Effectiveness of knowledge brokering and recommendation dissemination for influencing healthcare resource allocation decisions : a cluster randomised controlled implementation trial
- Sarkies, Mitchell, Robins, Lauren, Jepson, Megan, Williams, Cylie, Martin, Jennifer
- Authors: Sarkies, Mitchell , Robins, Lauren , Jepson, Megan , Williams, Cylie , Martin, Jennifer
- Date: 2021
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: PLoS Medicine Vol. 18, no. 10 (2021), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background Implementing evidence into clinical practice is a key focus of healthcare improvements to reduce unwarranted variation. Dissemination of evidence-based recommendations and knowledge brokering have emerged as potential strategies to achieve evidence implementation by influencing resource allocation decisions. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of these two research implementation strategies to facilitate evidence-informed healthcare management decisions for the provision of inpatient weekend allied health services. Methods and findings This multicentre, single-blinded (data collection and analysis), three-group parallel cluster randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation was conducted in Australian and New Zealand hospitals between February 2018 and January 2020. Clustering and randomisation took place at the organisation level where weekend allied health staffing decisions were made (e.g., network of hospitals or single hospital). Hospital wards were nested within these decision-making structures. Three conditions were compared over a 12-month period: (1) usual practice waitlist control; (2) dissemination of written evidence-based practice recommendations; and (3) access to a webinar-based knowledge broker in addition to the recommendations. The primary outcome was the alignment of weekend allied health provision with practice recommendations at the cluster and ward levels, addressing the adoption, penetration, and fidelity to the recommendations. The secondary outcome was mean hospital length of stay at the ward level. Outcomes were collected at baseline and 12 months later. A total of 45 clusters (n = 833 wards) were randomised to either control (n = 15), recommendation (n = 16), or knowledge broker (n = 14) conditions. Four (9%) did not provide follow-up data, and no adverse events were recorded. No significant effect was found with either implementation strategy for the primary outcome at the cluster level (recommendation versus control β 18.11 [95% CI −8,721.81 to 8,758.02] p = 0.997; knowledge broker versus control β 1.24 [95% CI −6,992.60 to 6,995.07] p = 1.000; recommendation versus knowledge broker β −9.12 [95% CI −3,878.39 to 3,860.16] p = 0.996) or ward level (recommendation versus control β 0.01 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.75] p = 0.983; knowledge broker versus control β −0.12 [95% CI −0.54 to 0.30] p = 0.581; recommendation versus knowledge broker β −0.19 [−1.04 to 0.65] p = 0.651). There was no significant effect between strategies for the secondary outcome at ward level (recommendation versus control β 2.19 [95% CI −1.36 to 5.74] p = 0.219; knowledge broker versus control β −0.55 [95% CI −1.16 to 0.06] p = 0.075; recommendation versus knowledge broker β −3.75 [95% CI −8.33 to 0.82] p = 0.102). None of the control or knowledge broker clusters transitioned to partial or full alignment with the recommendations. Three (20%) of the clusters who only received the written recommendations transitioned from nonalignment to partial alignment. Limitations include underpowering at the cluster level sample due to the grouping of multiple geographically distinct hospitals to avoid contamination. Conclusions Owing to a lack of power at the cluster level, this trial was unable to identify a difference between the knowledge broker strategy and dissemination of recommendations compared with usual practice for the promotion of evidence-informed resource allocation to inpatient weekend allied health services. Future research is needed to determine the interactions between different implementation strategies and healthcare contexts when translating evidence into healthcare practice. © 2021 Sarkies et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
- Authors: Sarkies, Mitchell , Robins, Lauren , Jepson, Megan , Williams, Cylie , Martin, Jennifer
- Date: 2021
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: PLoS Medicine Vol. 18, no. 10 (2021), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Background Implementing evidence into clinical practice is a key focus of healthcare improvements to reduce unwarranted variation. Dissemination of evidence-based recommendations and knowledge brokering have emerged as potential strategies to achieve evidence implementation by influencing resource allocation decisions. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of these two research implementation strategies to facilitate evidence-informed healthcare management decisions for the provision of inpatient weekend allied health services. Methods and findings This multicentre, single-blinded (data collection and analysis), three-group parallel cluster randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation was conducted in Australian and New Zealand hospitals between February 2018 and January 2020. Clustering and randomisation took place at the organisation level where weekend allied health staffing decisions were made (e.g., network of hospitals or single hospital). Hospital wards were nested within these decision-making structures. Three conditions were compared over a 12-month period: (1) usual practice waitlist control; (2) dissemination of written evidence-based practice recommendations; and (3) access to a webinar-based knowledge broker in addition to the recommendations. The primary outcome was the alignment of weekend allied health provision with practice recommendations at the cluster and ward levels, addressing the adoption, penetration, and fidelity to the recommendations. The secondary outcome was mean hospital length of stay at the ward level. Outcomes were collected at baseline and 12 months later. A total of 45 clusters (n = 833 wards) were randomised to either control (n = 15), recommendation (n = 16), or knowledge broker (n = 14) conditions. Four (9%) did not provide follow-up data, and no adverse events were recorded. No significant effect was found with either implementation strategy for the primary outcome at the cluster level (recommendation versus control β 18.11 [95% CI −8,721.81 to 8,758.02] p = 0.997; knowledge broker versus control β 1.24 [95% CI −6,992.60 to 6,995.07] p = 1.000; recommendation versus knowledge broker β −9.12 [95% CI −3,878.39 to 3,860.16] p = 0.996) or ward level (recommendation versus control β 0.01 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.75] p = 0.983; knowledge broker versus control β −0.12 [95% CI −0.54 to 0.30] p = 0.581; recommendation versus knowledge broker β −0.19 [−1.04 to 0.65] p = 0.651). There was no significant effect between strategies for the secondary outcome at ward level (recommendation versus control β 2.19 [95% CI −1.36 to 5.74] p = 0.219; knowledge broker versus control β −0.55 [95% CI −1.16 to 0.06] p = 0.075; recommendation versus knowledge broker β −3.75 [95% CI −8.33 to 0.82] p = 0.102). None of the control or knowledge broker clusters transitioned to partial or full alignment with the recommendations. Three (20%) of the clusters who only received the written recommendations transitioned from nonalignment to partial alignment. Limitations include underpowering at the cluster level sample due to the grouping of multiple geographically distinct hospitals to avoid contamination. Conclusions Owing to a lack of power at the cluster level, this trial was unable to identify a difference between the knowledge broker strategy and dissemination of recommendations compared with usual practice for the promotion of evidence-informed resource allocation to inpatient weekend allied health services. Future research is needed to determine the interactions between different implementation strategies and healthcare contexts when translating evidence into healthcare practice. © 2021 Sarkies et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »