Ewout B. Smit

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) induced malnutrition is a common and serious problem resulting in a higher risk of complications, exacerbations, and hospitalization. We developed an inpatient geriatric rehabilitation program for patients with severe COPD and malnutrition and demonstrated its feasibility. The aim of the current study was to explore its preliminary effects. A prospective case series was conducted, including a total of eight patients with severe COPD and low fat-free muscle mass index (FFMi). Our 6-10 weeks program consisted of anaerobic resistance training, based on the nonlinear periodized exercise (NLPE) principles, nutritional support, psychoeducation on physical energy management, combined with a restriction of physical activities. Overall activity level, as measured in metabolic equivalents (METs), remained consistently below 3 METs for all patients. Primary outcomes were changes body composition (FFMi, body mass index (BMI), and body weight), muscle function, and exercise performance from the start and end of the study. We used paired samples t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare pre and postscores. Body composition and muscle function showed both significant and clinically relevant improvements after discharge of the program. Exercise performance showed a clinically relevant improvement. Additionally, ADL independence and health-related quality of life were improved. The patients in the current study had a clinical improved body composition, increased personal FFMi and exercise performance despite the absence of cardio-training and restrictions in functional walking distance. A cluster randomized controlled study will be necessary to show the definitive effect of the intervention.

Background and Purpose: Patients with COPD-induced malnutrition and muscle wasting are often frail. Consequently, traditional rehabilitation may be even counterproductive due to energy costs and there is a need for specialized rehabilitation programs, which are lacking for these patients. We developed such a program, which includes resistance training, following Nonlinear Periodized Exercise principles and physical energy management, in combination with a restriction of physical activities. The purpose of the study was to investigate the feasibility and the potential effects of this program. Methods: Patients who are eligible for the program are those with COPD gold III/IV and a fat free mass index below standard. We conducted a qualitative feasibility study and interviewed both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs), using a deductive approach. The open interviews were qualitatively analyzed focussing on six areas of Bowens’ feasibility model: acceptability, demand, implementation, practicality, limited efficacy, and integration. Results and discussions: Seven patients and seven HCPs were interviewed. For patients, key factors that helped to adhere to the program were knowledge about energy management, alternative skills to cope with COPD, and social support. They found the program beneficial. However, several patients considered a limitation of walking and ADL activities challenging. HCPs considered the program feasible and beneficial especially for those patients who accept they need a behavior change and who adhere to the program. For HCPs, key factors were the consistent approach and coaching skills of the multidisciplinary team members, and the monitoring role of the nurses. The limitation of physical activity and endurance training deviates from existing geriatric rehabilitation programs which propagate functional activity and training. Still, evidence from the current study suggests that our tailored approach for these patients might be more appropriate and also potentially effective without harm for physical function. Conclusions: Our novel, multidisciplinary rehabilitation program is considered feasible and clinically relevant by both patients and healthcare professionals. The next step is to explore its effects on muscle strength, physical functioning, and quality of life.

Objectives To present an overview of effectiveness and training characteristics of physical training on aerobic fitness, compared with alternative or no training, in adults aged over 65 years with various health statuses, providing a basis for guidelines for aerobic training of vulnerable older adults that can be used in geriatric rehabilitation. Design An umbrella review of systematic reviews that included both randomised controlled trials and other types of trials. Data sources MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched on 9 September 2019. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies We included systematic reviews reporting on physical training interventions that are expected to improve aerobic fitness, presenting results for adults aged 65 years and older, describing at least one of the FITT-characteristics: Frequency, Intensity, Time or Type of exercise, and measuring aerobic fitness at least before and after the intervention. Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was performed. Results We included 51 papers on 49 reviews. Positive effect of training on aerobic fitness was reported by 33 reviews, 11 reviews remained inconclusive and 5 reviews reported no effect. Training characteristics varied largely. Frequency: 1–35 sessions/week, Intensity: light–vigorous, Time: Conclusion Physical fitness training can be effective for vulnerable older adults. Exercise characteristics from current existing guidelines are widely applicable, although lower frequencies and intensities are also beneficial. For some conditions, adjustments are advised. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020140575.

Purpose: To develop and test the validity of a Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) short form for measuring physical function of geriatric rehabilitation patients. Methods: Experts selected items from the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS v1.2 Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) item bank and proposed new items to develop the PROMIS-PF short form for geriatric rehabilitation (PROMIS-PF-GR). Patients evaluated its content validity. Structural validity was assessed by evaluating unidimensionality (confirmatory, exploratory, and bi-factor analyses [criterion: Omega H > 0.80 and ECV > 0.60]), local independence (criterion: residual correlation < 0.20) ,and monotonicity (criterion: H_i-coefficient ≥ 0.30). Measurement invariance was assessed by evaluating Differential Item Functioning (DIF) between geriatric rehabilitation patients and people from the general population using ordinal logistic regression. Internal consistency was assessed by calculating Cronbach’s alpha (criterion: alpha ≥ 0.70). Results: Experts selected 24 items from the PROMIS-PF item bank and proposed one new item which was not included in the short form. Patients considered the 24 items relevant and containing essential information. The PROMIS-PF-GR’s psychometric properties were evaluated in 207 patients (mean age ± SD, 80.0 ± 8.3 year; 58% female). The 24 items were found to be sufficiently unidimensional (Omega H = 0.82, ECV = 0.70), locally independent (98.7% item pairs), and monotone (all ≥ 0.32). Five items were flagged for DIF, but their impact on the total score was negligible. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.94. Conclusion: The PROMIS-PF-GR was developed from the PROMIS-PF and has good content validity, structural validity, measurement invariance, and internal consistency in Dutch geriatric rehabilitation patients. We recommend to confirm the content validity of the PROMIS-PF-GR in other countries.

Objective: To explore the effect of goal-setting on physical functioning, quality of life and duration of rehabilitation in geriatric rehabilitation compared to care as usual. Data sources: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched from initiation to October 2018. Methods: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before–after studies and studies using historic controls of older patients (mean age ⩾55 years) receiving rehabilitation for acquired disabilities. Our primary outcome was physical functioning; secondary outcomes were quality of life and rehabilitation duration. Cochrane guidelines were used to assess the risk of bias of the studies and extract data. Only RCT data were pooled using standardized mean difference (SMD). Results: We included 14 studies consisting of a total of 1915 participants with a mean age ranging from 55 to 83 years. Ten out of the 14 studies had a randomized controlled design, 7 of which could be pooled for the primary outcome. The risk of bias was judged high in several domains in all included studies. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between goal-setting and care as usual for physical functioning (SMD −0.11 (−0.32 to 0.10)), quality of life (SMD 0.09 (−0.56 to 0.75)) and rehabilitation duration (MD 13.46 days (−2.46 to 29.38)). Conclusion: We found low-quality evidence that goal-setting does not result in better physical functioning compared to care as usual in geriatric rehabilitation. For quality of life and duration of rehabilitation, we could not exclude a clinically relevant effect.

Patient-centred goal setting is regarded as a beneficial intervention for geriatric rehabilitation. Nevertheless, its known laborious implementation in clinical practice remains an ongoing challenge. To improve implementation of patient-centred goal setting, the integration of goal setting with standardized measures has been proposed. Our objective of the current study was to explore the feasibility of Collaborative Functional Goal Setting (CFGS), i.e., using standardized functional measures to set and evaluate functional goals during geriatric rehabilitation.