Improving Exercise Interventions for Older Adults with Dementia: A Qualitative Exploration of Physiotherapists' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Dementia creates significant challenges to physical activity management in older adults due to progressive cognitive and behavioural impairments. Physiotherapists serve a critical role in designing exercise interventions. However, the lack of standardized dementia-specific training compromises the efficacy of care. Despite evidence on the benefits of physical activity for older adults with dementia (OAwD), the physiotherapists’ knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) to meet these specific needs remains unclear. This qualitative study explores the physiotherapists’ KAP in exercise prescription, aiming to identify unmet training needs and inform targeted strategies to optimize therapeutic outcomes for OAwD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative approach was used, employing semi structured interviews with 9 physiotherapists experienced in dementia care. Participants were selected through purposive sampling to capture diverse expertise. Data was analysed through thematic analysis uncovering patterns and insights related to KAP and its impact on care delivery. RESULTS: Four central themes emerged: Knowledge (theme 1), attitudes (theme 2), and practices (theme 3 and theme 4). Firstly, physiotherapists emphasized the importance of comprehensive assessments, utilizing tools such as the ‘Timed Up and Go test’ and ‘Montreal Cognitive Assessment’. Secondly, patience and adaptability were highlighted as essential due to cognitive decline associated with dementia. Thirdly, caregiver involvement and education were essential. Fourthly, goal oriented and functional exercises were prioritized. CONCLUSION: Physiotherapists showed a strong understanding of dementia care but highlighted the need for enhanced, specialized training. Addressing these gaps could improve exercise interventions and foster better health outcomes for OAwD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".