OBJECTIVES: to test the effects of an intervention involving sensor monitoring-informed occupational therapy on top of a cognitive behavioural treatment (CBT)-based coaching therapy on daily functioning in older patients after hip fracture.DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: three-armed randomised stepped wedge trial in six skilled nursing facilities, with assessments at baseline (during admission) and after 1, 4 and 6 months (at home). Eligible participants were hip fracture patients ≥ 65 years old.INTERVENTIONS: patients received care as usual, CBT-based occupational therapy or CBT-based occupational therapy with sensor monitoring. Interventions comprised a weekly session during institutionalisation, followed by four home visits and four telephone consultations over three months.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: the primary outcome was patient-reported daily functioning at 6 months, assessed with the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure.RESULTS: a total of 240 patients (mean[SD] age, 83.8[6.9] years were enrolled. At baseline, the mean Canadian Occupational Performance Measure scores (range 1-10) were 2.92 (SE 0.20) and 3.09 (SE 0.21) for the care as usual and CBT-based occupational therapy with sensor monitoring groups, respectively. At six months, these values were 6.42 (SE 0.47) and 7.59 (SE 0.50). The mean patient-reported daily functioning in the CBT-based occupational therapy with sensor monitoring group was larger than that in the care as usual group (difference 1.17 [95% CI (0.47-1.87) P = 0.001]. We found no significant differences in daily functioning between CBT-based occupational therapy and care as usual.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: among older patients recovering from hip fracture, a rehabilitation programme of sensor monitoring-informed occupational therapy was more effective in improving patient-reported daily functioning at six months than to care as usual.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch National Trial Register, NTR 5716.
Introduction Radical cystectomy (RC) is the standard treatment for patients with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer, as well as for patients with therapy refractory high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. However, 50–65% of patients undergoing RC experience perioperative complications. The risk, severity and impact of these complications is associated with a patient’s preoperative cardiorespiratory fitness, nutritional and smoking status and presence of anxiety and depression. There is emerging evidence supporting multimodal prehabilitation as a strategy to reduce the risk of complications and improve functional recovery after major cancer surgery. However, for bladder cancer the evidence is still limited. The aim of this study is to investigate the superiority of a multimodal prehabilitation programme versus standard-of-care in terms of reducing perioperative complications in patients with bladder cancer undergoing RC.Methods and analysis This multicentre, open label, prospective, randomised controlled trial, will include 154 patients with bladder cancer undergoing RC. Patients are recruited from eight hospitals in The Netherlands and will be randomly (1:1) allocated to the intervention group receiving a structured multimodal prehabilitation programme of approximately 3–6 weeks, or to the control group receiving standard-of-care. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who develop one or more grade ≥2 complications (according to the Clavien-Dindo classification) within 90 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes include cardiorespiratory fitness, length of hospital stay, health-related quality of life, tumour tissue biomarkers of hypoxia, immune cell infiltration and cost-effectiveness. Data collection will take place at baseline, before surgery and 4 and 12 weeks after surgery.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Medical Ethics Committee NedMec (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) under reference number 22–595/NL78792.031.22. Results of the study will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT05480735.
Background: According to the principles of Reablement, home care services are meant to be goal-oriented, holistic and person-centred taking into account the capabilities and opportunities of older adults. However, home care services traditionally focus on doing things for older adults rather than with them. To implement Reablement in practice, the ‘Stay Active at Home’ programme was developed. It is assumed that the programme leads to a reduction in sedentary behaviour in older adults and consequently more cost-effective outcomes in terms of their health and wellbeing. However, this has yet to be proven. Methods/ design: A two-group cluster randomised controlled trial with 12 months follow-up will be conducted. Ten nursing teams will be selected, pre-stratified on working area and randomised into an intervention group (‘Stay Active at Home’) or control group (no training). All nurses of the participating teams are eligible to participate in the study. Older adults and, if applicable, their domestic support workers (DSWs) will be allocated to the intervention or control group as well, based on the allocation of the nursing team. Older adults are eligible to participate, if they: 1) receive homecare services by the selected teams; and 2) are 65 years or older. Older adults will be excluded if they: 1) are terminally ill or bedbound; 2) have serious cognitive or psychological problems; or 3) are unable to communicate in Dutch. DSWs are eligible to participate if they provide services to clients who fulfil the eligibility criteria for older adults. The study consists of an effect evaluation (primary outcome: sedentary behaviour in older adults), an economic evaluation and a process evaluation. Data for the effect and economic evaluation will be collected at baseline and 6 and/or 12 months after baseline using performance-based and self-reported measures. In addition, data from client records will be extracted. A mixed-methods design will be applied for the process evaluation, collecting data of older adults and professionals throughout the study period. Discussion: This study will result in evidence about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of the ‘Stay Active at Home’ programme.
