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

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Study protocol

A community-based physical activity intervention to prevent mobility-related disability for retired older people (REtirement in ACTion (REACT)): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Authors: Afroditi Stathi, Janet Withall, Colin J. Greaves, Janice L. Thompson, Gordon Taylor, Antonieta Medina-Lara, Colin Green, James Bilzon, Selena Gray, Heidi Johansen-Berg, Claire E. Sexton, Max J. Western, Jolanthe L. de Koning, Jessica C. Bollen, Sarah J. Moorlock, Naiara Demnitz, Poppy Seager, Jack M. Guralnik, W. Jack Rejeski, Ken R. Fox

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The REtirement in ACTion (REACT) study is a multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an internal pilot phase. It aims to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a community, group-based physical activity intervention for reducing, or reversing, the progression of functional limitations in older people who are at high risk of mobility-related disability.

Methods/design

A sample of 768 sedentary, community-dwelling, older people aged 65 years and over with functional limitations, but who are still ambulatory (scores between 4 and 9 out of 12 in the Short Physical Performance Battery test (SPPB)) will be randomised to receive either the REACT intervention, delivered over a period of 12 months by trained facilitators, or a minimal control intervention. The REACT study incorporates comprehensive process and economic evaluation and a nested sub-study which will test the hypothesis that the REACT intervention will slow the rate of brain atrophy and of decline in cognitive function assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Outcome data will be collected at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months for the main study, with MRI sub-study data collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months.
The primary outcome analysis (SPPB score at 24 months) will be undertaken blinded to group allocation. Primary comparative analyses will be on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis with due emphasis placed on confidence intervals.

Discussion

REACT represents the first large-scale, pragmatic, community-based trial in the UK to target the non-disabled but high-risk segment of the older population with an intervention to reduce mobility-related disability. A programme that can successfully engage this population in sufficient activity to improve strength, aerobic capacity, coordination and balance would have a major impact on sustaining health and independence.
REACT is also the first study of its kind to conduct a full economic and comprehensive process evaluation alongside the RCT. If effective and cost-effective, the REACT intervention has strong potential to be implemented widely in the UK and elsewhere.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ID:ISRCTN45627165. Retrospectively registered on 13 June 2016.
Trial sponsor: University of Bath. Protocol Version 1.5.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Gale CR, Cooper C, Aihie SA. Prevalence of frailty and disability: findings from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Age Ageing. 2015;44:162–5.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert MO, Rockwood K. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013;381:752–62.CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Stathi A, Western M, de Koning J, Perkin O, Withall J. Implementing Physical Activity Programmes for Community-Dwelling Older People with Early Signs of Physical Frailty. In: Nyman S. et al. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Ageing and Physical Activity Promotion. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan; 2018. p. 401–422.
5.
Cooper R, Kuh D, Cooper C, Gale CR, Lawlor DA, Matthews F, Hardy R, the FaHST. Objective measures of physical capability and subsequent health: a systematic review. Age Ageing. 2011;40:14–23.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Simmonds B, Fox K, Davis M, Ku P-W, Gray S, Hillsdon M, et al. Objectively Assessed Physical Activity and Subsequent Health Service Use of UK Adults Aged 70 and Over: A Four to Five Year Follow Up Study. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:5.
7.
Giné-Garriga M, Roqué-Fíguls M, Coll-Planas L, Sitja-Rabert M, Salvà A. Physical exercise interventions for improving performance-based measures of physical function in community-dwelling, frail older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95:753–69.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Pahor M, Guralnik JM, Ambrosius WT, Blair S, Bonds DE, Church TS, Espeland MA, Fielding RA, Gill TM, Groessl EJ. Effect of structured physical activity on prevention of major mobility disability in older adults: the LIFE study randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;311:2387–96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337.
10.
HSE: Health Survey for England. (Health Do ed., vol. 1); 2011.
11.
Marmot MG, Allen J, Goldblatt P, Boyce T, McNeish D, Grady M, Geddes I. Fair society, healthy lives: the Marmot ReviewSource: SCIE Social Care Online - 01 January 2010. London: Marmot Review; 2010.
12.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Health Disparities and Inequalities Report. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60:1–116.
13.
Vasunilashorn S, Coppin AK, Patel KV, Lauretani F, Ferrucci L, Bandinelli S, Guralnik JM. Use of the Short Physical Performance Battery Score to predict loss of ability to walk 400 meters: analysis from the InCHIANTI Study. J Gerontol Series A. 2009;64A:223–9.CrossRef
14.
15.
Taves DR. Minimization: a new method of assigning patients to treatment and control groups. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1974;15:443–53.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Pocock SJ, Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics. 1975;31:103–15.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Nelson ME, Layne JE, Bernstein MJ, Nuernberger A, Castaneda C, et al. The effects of multidimensional home-based exercise on functional performance in elderly people. J Gerontol. 2004;59:M154–60.CrossRef
18.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. A Self-Determination Theory approach to psychotherapy: the motivational basis for effective change. Can Psychol. 2008;49:186–93.CrossRef
19.
Marcus BH, Forsyth LH. Motivating people to be physically active. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2008.
20.
Greaves CJ, Sheppard KE, Abraham C, Hardeman W, Roden M, Evans PH, Schwarz P. Systematic review of reviews of intervention components associated with increased effectiveness in dietary and physical activity interventions. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:119.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Bellg AJ, Borrelli B, Resnick B, Hecht J, Minicucci DS, Ory M. Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: best practices and recommendations from the NIH Behavior Change Consortium. Health Psychol. 2004;23:443–51.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Deci EL, Ryan RM. Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester: The University of Rochester Press; 2002.
23.
Bandura A. Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory. Psychol Health. 1998;13:623–49.CrossRef
24.
Greaves C, Poltawski L, Garside R, Briscoe S. Understanding the challenge of weight loss maintenance: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research on weight loss maintenance. Health Psychol Rev. 2017;11:145–63.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Perera S, Studenski S, Chandler JM, Guralnik JM. Magnitude and patterns of decline in health and function in 1 year affect subsequent 5-year survival. J Gerontol Ser A Biol Med Sci. 2005;60:894–900.CrossRef
26.
Curtis L, Burns A. Unit costs of health and social care 2016. Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent, Canterbury; 2016.
27.
28.
Brazier J. Valuing health states for use in cost-effectiveness analysis. PharmacoEconomics. 2008;26:769–79.CrossRefPubMed
29.
van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, Lloyd A, Scalone L, Kind P, Pickard AS. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15:708–15.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press; 2015.
31.
32.
Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, Augustovski F, Briggs AH, Mauskopf J, Loder E. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2013;11:6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Black WC. The CE plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Med Decis Mak. 1990;10:212–4.CrossRef
34.
Fenwick E, Marshall DA, Levy AR, Nichol G. Using and interpreting cost-effectiveness acceptability curves: an example using data from a trial of management strategies for atrial fibrillation. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Faria R, Gomes M, Epstein D, White IR. A guide to handling missing data in cost-effectiveness analysis conducted within randomised controlled trials. PharmacoEconomics. 2014;32:1157–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O’Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2015;350:h1258.CrossRef
37.
Dreyfus SE. The five-stage model of adult skill acquisition. Bull Sci Technol Soc. 2004;24:177–82.CrossRef
38.
Lubitz J, Cai L, Kramarow E, Lentzner H. Health, life expectancy, and health care spending among the elderly. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1048–55.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
A community-based physical activity intervention to prevent mobility-related disability for retired older people (REtirement in ACTion (REACT)): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Authors
Afroditi Stathi
Janet Withall
Colin J. Greaves
Janice L. Thompson
Gordon Taylor
Antonieta Medina-Lara
Colin Green
James Bilzon
Selena Gray
Heidi Johansen-Berg
Claire E. Sexton
Max J. Western
Jolanthe L. de Koning
Jessica C. Bollen
Sarah J. Moorlock
Naiara Demnitz
Poppy Seager
Jack M. Guralnik
W. Jack Rejeski
Ken R. Fox
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2603-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Trials 1/2018 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Zopiclone versus placebo for short-term treatment of insomnia in patients with advanced cancer: study protocol for a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical multicenter trial

Methodology

Planning a future randomized clinical trial based on a network of relevant past trials

Study protocol

Acupuncture as an early treatment for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSNHL) patients with flat or high-frequency drop audiograms: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Prophylactic antibiotics to reduce pelvic infection in women having miscarriage surgery – The AIMS (Antibiotics in Miscarriage Surgery) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Effect of training community health workers and their interventions on cardiovascular disease risk factors among adults in Morogoro, Tanzania: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Methodology

Development of a framework to improve the process of recruitment to randomised controlled trials (RCTs): the SEAR (Screened, Eligible, Approached, Randomised) framework