Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Study protocol

Methodological and clinical implications of a three-in-one Russian doll design for tracking health trajectories and improving health and function through innovative exercise treatments in adults with disability

Authors: James H. Rimmer, Cassandra Herman, Brooks Wingo, Kevin Fontaine, Tapan Mehta

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Hybrid research designs targeting adults with neurologic disability are critical for improving the efficiency of models that can identify, track and intervene on identified health issues.

Methods

Our Russian doll framework encompasses three study phases. Phase 1 involves prospectively following a cohort of participants with disability to examine the relationships between rates of health and functional deficits (e.g., pain, fatigue, deconditioning), functional measures (e.g., cardiorespiratory endurance, strength, balance), and environmental and sociocultural factors. In Phase 2, eligible participants with neurologic disability from Phase 1 (in our example, individuals with multiple sclerosis) are screened and randomized to a clinical exercise efficacy trial. In Phase 3, study participants are enrolled in a home-based teleexercise trial to test the feasibility and replicability of delivering the clinical exercise study in the home.

Discussion

This unique three-in-one Russian doll framework serves as a foundation for informing and guiding researchers and clinicians in treating certain health and functional deficits in people with neurologic disability using exercise as a primary treatment modality in both the clinical and home settings. It offers a unique perspective for understanding the critical issues of functioning, health maintenance and quality of life for people with neurologic disability across a longitudinal framework.

Trial registration

Study 2 ClinicalTrials.​gov identifier NCT02533882 (retroactively registered 03/06/2015). Study 3 ClinicalTrials.​gov identifier NCT03108950 (retroactively registered 04/05/2017).
Literature
1.
Capoor J, Stein AB. Aging with spinal cord injury. Phy Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2005;16:129–61.CrossRef
2.
Cook KF, Molton IR, Jensen MP. Fatigue and aging with a disability. Arch Phy Med Rehabil. 2011;92(7):1126–33.
3.
Campbell M, Sheets D, Strong PS. Secondary health conditions among middle-aged individuals with chronic physical disabilities: implications for unmet needs and services. Asst Tech. 1999;11:105–22.CrossRef
4.
5.
Wilber N, Mitra M, Walker D, et al. Disability as a public health issue: findings and reflections from the Massachusetts survey of secondary conditions. Milbank Q. 2002;80:393–421.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Ravesloot C, Seekins T, Walsh J. A structural analysis of secondary conditions experienced by people with physical disabilities. Rehabil Psychol. 1997;42:3–16.CrossRef
7.
Santiago M, Coyle C. Leisure-time physical activity and secondary conditions in women with physical disabilities. Dis Rehabil. 2004;26:485–94.CrossRef
8.
Bauman W. Secondary conditions with spinal cord injury. In: Field M, Jette AM, Martin L, editors. Workshop on disability in America. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006. p. 222–33.
9.
Jensen MP, Chodroff MJ, Dworkin RH. The impact of neuropathic pain on health-related quality of life: review and implications. Neurology. 2007;68(15):1178.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Nash M, Cowan RE, Kressler J. Evidence-based and heuristic approaches for customization of care in cardiometabolic syndrome after spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2012;35:278–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Anson CA, Shepherd C. Incidence of secondary complications in spinal cord injury. Int Journal Rehabil Res. 1996;19(1):55–66.CrossRef
12.
Charlifue S, Weitzenkamp DA, Whiteneck GG. Longitudinal outcomes in spinal cord injury: aging, secondary conditions and well-being. Arch Phy Med Rehabil. 1999;80:1429–34.CrossRef
13.
Krause J. Secondary conditions and spinal cord injury: a model for prediction and prevention. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 1996;2(2):58–70.
14.
Lollar D, Crews JE. Secondary conditions. In: Albrecht GA, editor. Encyclopedia of disability. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005.
15.
Ipsen C. Health, secondary conditions, and employment outcomes for adults with disabilities. J Disabil Policy Studies. 2006;(2):77–87.
16.
Drum C, Krahn G, Culley C, et al. Recognizing and responding to the health disparities of people with disabilities. Californian J Health Promot. 2005;3:29–42.
17.
Krause J, Bell RB. Measuring quality of life and secondary conditions: experiences with spinal cord injury. In: Simeonsson R, McDevitt L, eds., ed. Issues in Disability and Health: The Role of Secondary Conditions and Quality of Life. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press; 1999.
18.
Charlifue S, Weitzenkamp DA, Whiteneck GG. Longitudinal outcomes in spinal cord injury: aging, secondary conditions, and well-being. Arch Phy Med Rehabil. 1999;80:1429–34.CrossRef
19.
Ravesloot C, Seekins T, White G. Living well with a disability health promotion intervention: improved health status for consumers and lower costs for health care policymakers. Rehab Psych. 2005;50:239–45.CrossRef
20.
Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services;2008.
21.
Field MJ, Jette AM, editors. The future of disability in America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007.
22.
Rimmer J, Chen M-D, McCubbin JA, Drum C, Peterson J. Exercise intervention research on persons with disabilities. What we know and where we need to go. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;89:249–63.CrossRefPubMed
23.
U.S. Department of health and human services. Physical activity and health: a report of the surgeon general. Atlanta: GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for chronic disease prevention and. Health Promotion. 1996;
24.
25.
Rimmer JH, Chen M-D, Hsieh K. A conceptual model for identifying, preventing and treating secondary conditions in people with disabilities. Phy Ther. 2011;91:1728–38.CrossRef
26.
Bombardier CH, Richards JS, Krause JS, Tulsky D, Tate DG. Symptoms of major depression in people with spinal cord injury: implications for screening. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(11):1749–56.
27.
Turk MA. Secondary conditions and disability. In: Field MJ, Jette AM, Martin L, editors. Workshop on disability in America. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2005.
28.
Campbell M, Sheets D, Strong PS. Secondary health conditions among middle-aged individuals with chronic physical disabilities: implications for unmet needs and services. Asst Tech. 1999;11(2):105–22.CrossRef
29.
Muscle LJ. Structure and function in chronic neurological disorders: the potential of exercise to improve activities of daily living. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2000;28(2):80–4.
30.
Henry A, Banks S, Clark R, Himmelstein J. Mobility limitations negatively impact work outcomes among Medicaid enrollees with disabilities. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17:355–69.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Moss K, Burris S. The employment discrimination provisions of the Americans with disabilities act: implementation and impact. In: Field MJ, Jette AM, editors. The future of disability in America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007. p. 453–77.
32.
Rimmer JH, Wang E, Pellegrini CA, Lullo C, Telehealth GB. Weight management intervention for adults with physical disabilities. A randomized controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;92:1084–94.CrossRef
33.
34.
Rimmer JH, Rubin SS, Braddock D. Barriers to exercise in African American women with physical disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil Feb. 2000;81(2):182–8.CrossRef
35.
Rimmer JH, Silverman K, Braunschweig C, Quinn L, Liu Y. Feasibility of a health promotion intervention for a group of predominantly African American women with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2002;28(4):571–80.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Shields N, Synnot AJ, Barr M. Perceived barriers and facilitators to physical activity for children with disability: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2011;46:989–97.
37.
Rimmer JH, Riley B, Wang E, Rauworth A, Jurkowski J. Physical activity participation among persons with disabilities barriers and facilitators. Amer J Prev Med. 2004;26(5):419–25.CrossRef
38.
Arbour-Nicitopoulos K, Martin Ginis KA. Universal accessibility of "accessible" fitness and recreational facilities for persons with mobility disabilities. Adap Phy Act Q. 2011;28:1–15.
39.
Dolbow D, Figoni SF. Accommodation of wheelchair-reliant individuals by community fitness facilities. Spinal Cord. 2015;53:515–9.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Field M, Jette AM, editors. Workshop on the future of disability in America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007.
41.
42.
Rimmer JH, Henley KY. Building the crossroad between inpatient/outpatient rehabilitation and lifelong community-based fitness for people with neurologic disability. JNPT. 2013;37:72–7.
43.
Motl R, Pilutti LA, Sandroff BM. The importance of physical fitness in multiple sclerosis. J Nov Physiother. 2013;3:1–7
44.
Kishiyama S, Carlsen J, Lawrence J, Small E, Zajdel D, Yoga OB. As an experimental intervention for cognition in multiple sclerosis. Int J Yoga Therap. 2002;12(1):57–62.
45.
Al-Rahamneh H, Eston RG. Prediction of peak oxygen consumption from the ratings of perceived exertion during a graded exercise test and ramp exercise test in able-bodied participants and paraplegic persons. Arch Phy Med Rehabil. 2011;92(2):277–83.
46.
Iezzoni L. Eliminationg health and health care disparities among the growing population of people with disabilities. Health Aff. 2011;30:1947–54.CrossRef
47.
Krahn G, Walker DK, Correa-De-Araujo R. Persons with disabilities as an unrecognized health disparity population. Am J Public Health. 2015;105:S198–206.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Dixon-Ibarra A, Horner-Johnson W. Disability status as an antecedent to chronic conditions: National Health Interview Survey, 2006–2012. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014;11:1–8.CrossRef
49.
Relton C, Torgerson D, O'Cathain A, Nicholl J. Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the "cohort multiple randomised controlled trial" design. BMJ. 2010;340:963–7.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Methodological and clinical implications of a three-in-one Russian doll design for tracking health trajectories and improving health and function through innovative exercise treatments in adults with disability
Authors
James H. Rimmer
Cassandra Herman
Brooks Wingo
Kevin Fontaine
Tapan Mehta
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0480-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research article

Methods for evaluating adverse drug event preventability in emergency department patients

Research article

The importance of including aliases in data linkage with vulnerable populations

Research article

Engaging military couples in marital research: does requesting referrals from service members to recruit their spouses introduce sample bias?

Debate

Pure intervention effect or effect in routine health care - blinded or non-blinded randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

The Ottawa SAH search algorithms: protocol for a multi- centre validation study of primary subarachnoid hemorrhage prediction models using health administrative data (the SAHepi prediction study protocol)

Research article

A systematic survey shows that reporting and handling of missing outcome data in networks of interventions is poor