PTOTOtherClinical rehabilitation2023

Improving physical activity in hospitalized patients: The preliminary effectiveness of a goal-directed movement intervention.

Jwm van Grootel, P Bor, J A Netjes and 2 others

PMID 37487188

WHAT IT FOUND

Hospitalized patients in usual care with movement sensors and daily goals averaged 50 active minutes per day versus 38 without.

Patients also reported less difficulty moving at discharge. This was a pre-post study, so other factors may explain the change.

Key findings

01Total active minutes per day increased from 38 to 50 after the intervention was added to usual care.

02Perceived difficulty to move at discharge decreased from 3.4 to 1.7 on a 0-10 scale.

03No significant differences were found in length of stay, discharge destination, immobility complications, or physical functioning scores.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study used a pre-post design without a concurrent control group, so differences could be due to time or other factors rather than the intervention itself. There were missing data for physical activity in 3 pre-implementation and 5 post-implementation patients. The evaluation of patient adoption was affected by a protocol error, leading to many missing responses and potentially overestimating satisfaction. The study was conducted on only two medical wards at a single center, which may limit generalizability. Patients who were wheelchair-dependent or had delirium were excluded, so results do not apply to those populations.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the University Medical Centre Utrecht.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume the intervention caused the increase in activity or reduced difficulty moving. Because this was a pre-post study without a concurrent control group, other changes in ward culture or patient population over time could explain the results.

Read it on PubMed →