Excessive alcohol consumers are in need for effective and targeted thiamine interventions to prevent the development of Korsakoff’s syndrome. Coercive home health care might be a solution to reach excessive alcohol consumers. In many parts of the world, an expansion is seen of more coercive community practices. Due to new legislation in the Netherlands, preventive coercive home health care is permitted. The objective of this article is twofold. Firstly, to describe this new Dutch legislation and secondly, to explore literature to identify themes that might contribute to less-intrusive coercive interventions at the excessive alcohol consumer’s home. Four articles have been identified which concentrate on experiences regarding coercive home health care. Preventive coercive home health care might benefit from a stable and trusting relationship. For healthcare organizations, this means that they need to pay attention to the health and safety of their employees to prevent outflow.
Objective: To evaluate the preliminary effectiveness of a goal-directed movement intervention using a movement sensor on physical activity of hospitalized patients. Design: Prospective, pre-post study. Setting: A university medical center. Participants: Patients admitted to the pulmonology and nephrology/gastro-enterology wards. Intervention: The movement intervention consisted of (1) self-monitoring of patients' physical activity, (2) setting daily movement goals and (3) posters with exercises and walking routes. Physical activity was measured with a movement sensor (PAM AM400) which measures active minutes per day. Main measures: Primary outcome was the mean difference in active minutes per day pre- and post-implementation. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, discharge destination, immobility-related complications, physical functioning, perceived difficulty to move, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality and the adoption of the intervention. Results: A total of 61 patients was included pre-implementation, and a total of 56 patients was included post-implementation. Pre-implementation, patients were active 38 ± 21 minutes (mean ± SD) per day, and post-implementation 50 ± 31 minutes per day (Δ12, P = 0.031). Perceived difficulty to move decreased from 3.4 to 1.7 (0-10) (Δ1.7, P = 0.008). No significant differences were found in other secondary outcomes. Conclusions: The goal-directed movement intervention seems to increase physical activity levels during hospitalization. Therefore, this intervention might be useful for other hospitals to stimulate inpatient physical activity.
Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) are more sedentary compared with the general population, but contemporary cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes do not specifically target sedentary behaviour (SB). We developed a 12-week, hybrid (centre-based+home-based) Sedentary behaviour IntervenTion as a personaLisEd Secondary prevention Strategy (SIT LESS). The SIT LESS programme is tailored to the needs of patients with CAD, using evidence-based behavioural change methods and an activity tracker connected to an online dashboard to enable self-monitoring and remote coaching. Following the intervention mapping principles, we first identified determinants of SB from literature to adapt theory-based methods and practical applications to target SB and then evaluated the intervention in advisory board meetings with patients and nurse specialists. This resulted in four core components of SIT LESS: (1) patient education, (2) goal setting, (3) motivational interviewing with coping planning, and (4) (tele)monitoring using a pocket-worn activity tracker connected to a smartphone application and providing vibrotactile feedback after prolonged sedentary bouts. We hypothesise that adding SIT LESS to contemporary CR will reduce SB in patients with CAD to a greater extent compared with usual care. Therefore, 212 patients with CAD will be recruited from two Dutch hospitals and randomised to CR (control) or CR+SIT LESS (intervention). Patients will be assessed prior to, immediately after and 3 months after CR. The primary comparison relates to the pre-CR versus post-CR difference in SB (objectively assessed in min/day) between the control and intervention groups. Secondary outcomes include between-group differences in SB characteristics (eg, number of sedentary bouts); change in SB 3 months after CR; changes in light-intensity and moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity; quality of life; and patients’ competencies for self-management. Outcomes of the SIT LESS randomised clinical trial will provide novel insight into the effectiveness of a structured, hybrid and personalised behaviour change intervention to attenuate SB in patients with CAD participating in CR.
MULTIFILE
