Conference paper Open Access
Hassett, L.M.; Van den Berg, M.E.L.; Weber, H.; Chagpar, S.; Wong, S.; Rabie, A.; Schurr, K.; McCluskey, M.A.; Lindsey, R.; Crotty, M.; Sherrington, C.
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?> <oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"> <dc:creator>Hassett, L.M.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Van den Berg, M.E.L.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Weber, H.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Chagpar, S.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Wong, S.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Rabie, A.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Schurr, K.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>McCluskey, M.A.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Lindsey, R.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Crotty, M.</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Sherrington, C.</dc:creator> <dc:date>2018-11-16</dc:date> <dc:description>PURPOSE: To describe technology use and physiotherapy support provided to participants to improve mobility and physical activity in the community phase of the AMOUNT trial. METHODS: Process evaluation including participants (mean age 70 (SD18)) randomised to the intervention group (n=149). Intervention was additional to standard rehabilitation, prescribed using a protocol which matched games/exercises from eight technologies to the participant’s mobility limitations. Technologies included video and computer games/exercises, tablet applications and activity monitors. Participants were taught to use the technologies during inpatient rehabilitation and were then discharged home to use the technologies ≥ 5 days a week for the remainder of the 6-month trial. Trial protocol required the physiotherapist to provide support every 1–2 weeks using a health coaching approach. Intervention datasheets were audited to determine technology use and frequency, duration, mode and type of support provided. RESULTS: Participants used an average of 2 (SD 1) technologies with 98% participants using an activity monitor. Physiotherapists had contact with participants on average 15 (SD 5) times (approximately every 11 days), consisting of 6 (SD 3) home visits (46 min duration), 8 (SD 4) phone calls (8 min duration) and 1 other (email, video conference, hospital) type of contact. Contact primarily incorporated health coaching (68%) with 8% for technology support. Topics discussed during health coaching included discussing data from prescribed technologies (79%), physical activity and mobility status (70%) and adherence (64%). CONCLUSIONS: Technologies to support ongoing exercise are likely to become increasingly important as the proportion of older people in the population increases and rehabilitation resources become limited. A health coaching model to support technology use post hospitalisation is feasible. Some support can be provided remotely limiting the need for frequent home visits.</dc:description> <dc:identifier>https://zenodo.org/record/1490149</dc:identifier> <dc:identifier>10.5281/zenodo.1490149</dc:identifier> <dc:identifier>oai:zenodo.org:1490149</dc:identifier> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dc:relation>doi:10.5281/zenodo.1490148</dc:relation> <dc:relation>url:https://zenodo.org/communities/rehabmove2018</dc:relation> <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights> <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights> <dc:title>RehabMove 2018: ACTIVITY AND MOBILITY USING TECHNOLOGY (AMOUNT) REHABILITATION TRIAL- DESCRIPTION OF COMMUNITY PHASE INTERVENTION</dc:title> <dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePaper</dc:type> <dc:type>publication-conferencepaper</dc:type> </oai_dc:dc>