Purpose: This study examined the effects of a giant (4×3 m) exercising board game intervention on ambulatory physical activity (PA) and a broader array of physical and psychological outcomes among nursing home residents. Materials and methods: A quasi-experimental longitudinal study was carried out in two comparable nursing homes. Ten participants (aged 82.5±6.3 and comprising 6 women) meeting the inclusion criteria took part in the 1-month intervention in one nursing home, whereas 11 participants (aged 89.9±3.1 with 8 women) were assigned to the control group in the other nursing home. The giant exercising board game required participants to per-form strength, flexibility, balance and endurance activities. The assistance provided by an exercising specialist decreased gradually during the intervention in an autonomy-oriented approach based on the self-determination theory. The following were assessed at baseline, after the intervention and after a follow-up period of 3 months: PA (steps/day and energy expenditure/day with ActiGraph), cognitive status (mini mental state examination), quality of life (EuroQol 5-dimensions), motivation for PA (Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2), gait and balance (Tinetti and Short Physical Performance Battery), functional mobility (timed up and go), and the muscular isometric strength of the lower limb muscles. Results and conclusion: In the intervention group, PA increased from 2,921 steps/day at baseline to 3,358 steps/day after the intervention (+14.9%, P=0.04) and 4,083 steps/day (+39.8%, P=0.03) after 3 months. Energy expenditure/day also increased after the intervention (+110 kcal/day, +6.3%, P=0.01) and after 3 months (+219 kcal/day, +12.3%, P=0.02). Quality of life (P<0.05), balance and gait (P<0.05), and strength of the ankle (P<0.05) were also improved after 3 months. Such improvements were not observed in the control group. The preliminary results are promising but further investigation is required to confirm and evaluate the long-term effectiveness of PA interventions in nursing homes.
Purpose – Over 8 per cent of the Dutch nursing home population is bedfast, and this number is slowly increasing. The quality of life (QoL) of this population is lower than that of residents who are still mobile. Little research has been conducted on how to improve the QoL of this bedfast population, particularly through making technological adjustments to the bed and the direct surroundings. The purpose of this paper is to gain insight into the QoL of bedfast residents and how to improve this through technology. Design/methodology/approach – A mixed-method multi-case study with thematic analysis was conducted in two nursing homes with seven participants based on semi-structured interviews and Short Form-12 questionnaire. Findings – The major causes of the experienced low QoL were the limited opportunities for engaging in social contacts with others, and coping with the dependency on other people and having limited control. Participants suggested improvements of QoL through the application of modern ccommunication technologies to engage in social contacts and to control the bed itself and environment around the bed. Practical implications – The results may help improve the design of the bed and the direct environment in order to improve the QoL of bedfast nursing home residents. Originality/value – The QoL of bedfast nursing home residents has not been studied before in relation to the bed itself and technological solutions that may help improve the QoL and level of control. CC BY Published by Emerald Publishing Limited Original article: https://doi.org/10.1108/JET-01-2018-0003 https://www.dehaagsehogeschool.nl/onderzoek/lectoraten/details/urban-ageing#over-het-lectoraat
BACKGROUND: Combining increased dietary protein intake and resistance exercise training for elderly people is a promising strategy to prevent or counteract the loss of muscle mass and decrease the risk of disabilities. Using findings from controlled interventions in a real-life setting requires adaptations to the intervention and working procedures of healthcare professionals (HCPs). The aim of this study is to adapt an efficacious intervention for elderly people to a real-life setting (phase one) and test the feasibility and potential impact of this prototype intervention in practice in a pilot study (phase two).METHODS: The Intervention Mapping approach was used to guide the adaptation in phase one. Qualitative data were collected from the original researchers, target group, and HCPs, and information was used to decide whether and how specified intervention elements needed to be adapted. In phase two, a one-group pre-test post-test pilot study was conducted (n = 25 community-dwelling elderly), to elicit further improvements to the prototype intervention. The evaluation included participant questionnaires and measurements at baseline (T0) and follow-up (T1), registration forms, interviews, and focus group discussions (T1). Qualitative data for both phases were analysed using an inductive approach. Outcome measures included physical functioning, strength, body composition, and dietary intake. Change in outcomes was assessed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.RESULTS: The most important adaptations to the original intervention were the design of HCP training and extending the original protein supplementation with a broader nutrition programme aimed at increasing protein intake, facilitated by a dietician. Although the prototype intervention was appreciated by participants and professionals, and perceived applicable for implementation, the pilot study process evaluation resulted in further adaptations, mostly concerning recruitment, training session guidance, and the nutrition programme. Pilot study outcome measures showed significant improvements in muscle strength and functioning, but no change in lean body mass.CONCLUSION: The combined nutrition and exercise intervention was successfully adapted to the real-life setting and seems to have included the most important effective intervention elements. After adaptation of the intervention using insights from the pilot study, a larger, controlled trial should be conducted to assess cost-effectiveness.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NL51834.081.14 (April 22, 2015).
