Understanding the Experiences of Rural Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Using a New DVD-Delivered Otago Exercise Program: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The home-based Otago Exercise Program (OEP) has been shown to reduce the occurrence of falls in community-dwelling seniors. A new OEP DVD was recently developed for people living in rural communities to be used with minimal coaching by a physical therapist. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand older adults' experiences using the DVD-delivered OEP and explore barriers and facilitators to implementing the DVD-delivered OEP from the participants' perspectives. METHODS: Rural community-dwelling older adults (75 years and older) who participated in a six-month DVD-delivered OEP study were invited to participate in this qualitative study. Two small group interviews were initially conducted to explore the breadth of participants' experiences with the program. These were followed by semi-structured individual interviews to gain an in-depth understanding of these experiences. An inductive constant comparison analysis of the transcripts was performed. To ensure methodological rigor, field notes, journaling, and an audit trail were maintained, supplemented by peer-review. RESULTS: Of 32 eligible participants, five participated in group interviews and 16 in individual interviews. Three themes emerged. Theme 1, The OEP DVD-useful training tool but in need of more pep, represented participants' experiences that the DVD provided important guidance at program onset, but was too slow and low-energy for longer-term use. Theme 2, Gaining control over one's exercise regimen, but sometimes life gets in the way of staying active, described participants' appreciation of the program's flexibility, but personal health concerns and everyday lives posed challenges to adhering to the program. Theme 3, Social creatures-wanting greater human connection during exercise, described how some participants desired further social interactions for enhancing motivation and receiving guidance. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals should be encouraged to refer to the OEP user manual or DVD as needed and engage friends and family in exercises. The importance of exercise even when living with health problems should be raised at program onset, and participants should be supported in working through challenging issues. Health professionals should work with individuals to integrate the program with their everyday activities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".