The Frailty Reduction via Implementation of Exercise, Nutrition, and Deprescribing (FRIEND) Trial: Study Protocol and Recruitment Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Virtually all adults in aged care facilities are frail, a condition which contributes to falls, cognitive decline, hospitalisation, and mortality. Polypharmacy, malnutrition, sedentariness, and sarcopenia are risk factors amenable to intervention. The Asia-Pacific Frailty Management Guidelines recommend anabolic exercise and the optimisation of medications and nutrition. However, no study has evaluated this best practice intervention triad in aged care. METHODS: The Frailty Reduction via the Implementation of Exercise, Nutrition, and Deprescribing (FRIEND) Trial (ANZCTR No.ACTRN12622000926730p) is a staged 6-month translational trial evaluating resident outcomes, staff/caregiver knowledge, and institutional implementation in a Townsville aged care facility. Residents received high-intensity resistance exercise and balance training and medication and nutrition optimisation co-implemented by investigators (exercise physiologist, geriatrician, pharmacist, and nutritionist) and facility staff. Staff and caregivers completed comprehensive education modules and training. We report the trial protocol and recruitment results. RESULTS: 29 residents (21 female, age: 88.6 ± 6.3 years) were recruited. At baseline, the residents were frail (frailty scale nursing home (FRAIL-NH); 6.3 ± 2.4/14), cognitively impaired (Montreal Cognitive Assessment; 13.8 ± 6.8/30), functionally impaired (Short Physical Performance Battery; 4.9 ± 3.1/12, 6 min walk distance; 222.2 ± 104.4 m), and were prescribed numerous medications (15.5 ± 5.9). Two residents died and one withdrew before the intervention's commencement. Thirty family members and 19 staff (carers, allied health assistants, nurse managers, registered nurses, lifestyle-leisure officers, kitchen/hospitality staff, and senior leadership) were recruited to receive frailty education modules. CONCLUSIONS: The FRIEND trial is currently being implemented with results expected in mid-2024. This is the first trial to evaluate the implementation of the best practice frailty guidelines including anabolic exercise and medication/nutritional optimisation in residential aged care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".