MedTrace Logo

Multicomponent Exercise vs Walking Intervention in Nursing Home Residents

NCT03996083 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 81

Last updated 2019-06-24

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

Physical exercise is an important tool to tackle the deleterious effect of aging. However, which is the best exercise intervention is still unknown. Moreover, many exercise interventions are complicated to implement, particularly in nursing homes. In contrast, walking is a simple, natural, and familiar mode of exercise that is well tolerated by older adults. Thus, the objective was to assess and compare the effects of an individualized multicomponent exercise program and an individualized and progressive walking intervention on LTNH residents´ physical and cognitive performance, habitual physical activity, psycho-affective status and quality of life.

Conditions

  • Aging

Interventions

OTHER

Multicomponent exercise intervention

Strength exercises were focused on lower limb strengthening. Individual bilateral intensities were calculated to estimate one repetition maximum (1-RM) for the leg and arm. This test was performed on the 2nd and 7th weeks of the intervention. A gradual and progressive intensity starting at 40% 1-RM and up 70% 1-RM was used. No external loads were applied to the rest of the exercises due to their complex execution technique and subsequent risk of adverse events. In these cases, training progression was achieved through volume (number of repetitions) and execution velocity increments. Balance exercises included standing with their feet together, semi-tandem, tandem and one-legged stand positions and moving on to dynamic exercises (circuits, stepping and so on). Difficulty was increased by reducing arm and base support and by varying the type and complexity of exercises. An individualized progression was applied to each participant based on their progress throughout the intervention.

OTHER

Walking intervention

To comply with the walking goals, walking distance was calculated based on each participant´s performance on the 6-minute walking test and using a rule of thumb. Therefore, every participant had an itinerary to follow to comply with the minimum walking time each week. Distance rather than time was used with participants for practical reasons and the inability of most of them to measure time. Moreover, time and distance were individually adapted according to each participant´s performance on the previous week. To ensure that participants complied with the walking goals, each of them (if they were cognitively able) was given a record sheet in which they had to write down their everyday walking routines. In addition, the caregivers were also informed about the walking routines and ensured that those participants who needed close supervision had someone to walk with and filled the sheet of those that were unable to do so.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Susana M Gil, MD, PhD · University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
DOUBLE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
70 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2018-02-01
Primary Completion
2019-04-01
Completion
2019-05-01

Countries

  • Spain

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT03996083 on ClinicalTrials.gov