Enhancing Physical Activity Recommendations to Support Cognition in Homecare: A Quality Improvement Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Physical activity is a safe, evidence-based self-management strategy for older adults (aged 65+) with cognitive impairment. Although homecare occupational therapists (OTs) and physiotherapists (PTs) are well positioned to support the growing number of older adults living at home with cognitive impairment, physical activity is rarely recommended as a strategy to manage cognition. Objective: To increase OTs’ and PTs’ knowledge of physical activity recommendations, as well as increase the range of physical activity recommendations for older adults living at home with cognitive impairment. Methods: This quality improvement project used a pre-post intervention approach. Data was collected through a pre-post clinician survey and pre-post chart audit to evaluate the impact of a multimodal education intervention on OT and PT knowledge and practice. The intervention included educational sessions and the development of four client handouts. Results: Post-intervention, OT and PT survey results showed a non-significant improvement in knowledge, and a greater range of physical activity recommendations. The PT chart audit demonstrated a statistically significant increase in PTs providing education about the role of physical activity in relation to cognitive impairment. For OTs, there was a non-significant increase in physical activity recommendations. Conclusions: This multimodal education resulted in non-significant improvements in knowledge for OTs and PTs, however there were significant practice changes for PTs when providing education to patients about the impact of physical activity on cognition. Future research could refine the targeting of this intervention to better meet the needs of OTs and incorporate an evaluation of patient outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".