MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092386928 · doi:10.1007/s12603-020-1483-4

Potential Efficacy of Pragmatic Exercise Program (SPRINT) During Hospitalization in Older Adults on Health Care and Physical Performance: A Pilot Study

2020· article· en· W3092386928 on OpenAlexaff
Éva Peyrusqué, Fanny Buckinx, Aline Bolduc, Caroline Law, Marie‐Jeanne Kergoat, Mylène Aubertin‐Leheudre

Bibliographic record

VenueThe journal of nutrition health & aging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSprintMedicinePhysical therapyPsychological interventionBalance (ability)Physical activityPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Immobilization contribute to iatrogenic decline in hospitalized older adult. Implementing physical activity (PA) seems to be one of the best and easy solution. However, PA interventions are poorly integrated into usual care and those available are either non-specific, need supervision or requested human/material resources. Thus, we aimed to assess the effect of a pragmatic, unsupervised, and specific PA program (SPRINT) on health care practice and functional capacities in hospitalized older patients. DESIGN: Single arm interventional pragmatic pilot study. SETTING: Geriatric Assessment Unit (GAU). PARTICIPANTS: Of the 39 patients (> 65 years) hospitalized in a GAU and eligible, 19 agreed to participate (AP) and 20 declined (N-AP). INTERVENTION: One of the 4 PA programs, developed by our team, was allocated according to mobility profile. Individual functional capacities (i.e. balance, walking speed, functional mobility profile (PFMP)), active time (METS> 1.5: min), length of hospitalization (LOS), discharge orientation were assessed at admission and discharge of GAU. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable. At discharge, the AP group improved more on walking speed (0.57 ± 0.21 vs. 0.64 ± 0.19; p = 0.013), Berg balance scale (41.8 ± 13.7 vs. 45.1 ± 9.7; p = 0.017) and PFMP (54.0 ± 7.1 vs 55.1 ± 5.5; p = 0.042) than the N-AP group. The LOS was significantly shorter in AP group compared to the N-AP group (5 vs. 36 days; p = 0.026) and more subjects in the AP group were oriented at home without health or social services (89.5 vs. 60%; p=0.065). CONCLUSION: SPRINT appears effective to counteract iatrogenic decline and decreased the LOS. Moreover, this simple pragmatic PA tool seems to improve the life trajectory and healthcare practice in aging population. Further researches are needed to confirm these promising pragmatic results.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe journal of nutrition health & agingSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207