Carla Fj Nooijen1, Henk J Stam1, Michael P Bergen2, Helma Mh Bongers-Janssen3, Linda Valent4, Sacha van Langeveld5, Jos Twisk6, Rita Jg van den Berg-Emons1. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam. 2. Rijndam Rehabilitation Institute, Rotterdam. 3. Adelante Center of Expertise in Rehabilitation and Audiology, Hoensbroek. 4. Heliomare Rehabilitation Center, Wijk aan Zee. 5. Rehabilitation Center De Hoogstraat, Utrecht. 6. Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center; Department of Health Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
QUESTIONS: For people with subacute spinal cord injury, does rehabilitation that is reinforced with the addition of a behavioural intervention to promote physical activity lead to a more active lifestyle than rehabilitation alone? DESIGN: Randomised, controlled trial with concealed allocation, intention-to-treat analysis, and blinded assessors. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-five adults with subacute spinal cord injury who were undergoing inpatient rehabilitation and were dependent on a manual wheelchair. The spinal cord injuries were characterised as: tetraplegia 33%; motor complete 62%; mean time since injury 150 days (SD 74). INTERVENTION: All participants received regular rehabilitation, including handcycle training. Only the experimental group received a behavioural intervention promoting an active lifestyle after discharge. This intervention involved 13 individual sessions delivered by a coach who was trained in motivational interviewing; it began 2 months before and ended 6 months after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was physical activity, which was objectively measured with an accelerometer-based activity monitor 2 months before discharge, at discharge, and 6 and 12 months after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. The accelerometry data were analysed as total wheeled physical activity, sedentary time and motility. Self-reported physical activity was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The behavioural intervention significantly increased wheeled physical activity (overall between-group difference from generalised estimating equation 21minutes per day, 95% CI 8 to 35). This difference was evident 6 months after discharge (28minutes per day, 95% CI 8 to 48) and maintained at 12 months after discharge (25minutes per day, 95% CI 1 to 50). No significant intervention effect was found for sedentary time or motility. Self-reported physical activity also significantly improved. CONCLUSION: The behavioural intervention was effective in eliciting a behavioural change toward a more active lifestyle among people with subacute spinal cord injury. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2424.
RCT Entities:
QUESTIONS: For people with subacute spinal cord injury, does rehabilitation that is reinforced with the addition of a behavioural intervention to promote physical activity lead to a more active lifestyle than rehabilitation alone? DESIGN: Randomised, controlled trial with concealed allocation, intention-to-treat analysis, and blinded assessors. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-five adults with subacute spinal cord injury who were undergoing inpatient rehabilitation and were dependent on a manual wheelchair. The spinal cord injuries were characterised as: tetraplegia 33%; motor complete 62%; mean time since injury 150 days (SD 74). INTERVENTION: All participants received regular rehabilitation, including handcycle training. Only the experimental group received a behavioural intervention promoting an active lifestyle after discharge. This intervention involved 13 individual sessions delivered by a coach who was trained in motivational interviewing; it began 2 months before and ended 6 months after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was physical activity, which was objectively measured with an accelerometer-based activity monitor 2 months before discharge, at discharge, and 6 and 12 months after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. The accelerometry data were analysed as total wheeled physical activity, sedentary time and motility. Self-reported physical activity was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The behavioural intervention significantly increased wheeled physical activity (overall between-group difference from generalised estimating equation 21minutes per day, 95% CI 8 to 35). This difference was evident 6 months after discharge (28minutes per day, 95% CI 8 to 48) and maintained at 12 months after discharge (25minutes per day, 95% CI 1 to 50). No significant intervention effect was found for sedentary time or motility. Self-reported physical activity also significantly improved. CONCLUSION: The behavioural intervention was effective in eliciting a behavioural change toward a more active lifestyle among people with subacute spinal cord injury. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR2424.
Authors: Charles H Bombardier; Joshua R Dyer; Patricia Burns; Deborah A Crane; Melissa M Takahashi; Jason Barber; Mark S Nash Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Michael Brogioli; Sophie Schneider; Werner L Popp; Urs Albisser; Anne K Brust; Inge-Marie Velstra; Roger Gassert; Armin Curt; Michelle L Starkey Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Krista L Best; François Routhier; Shane N Sweet; Kelly P Arbour-Nicitopoulos; Jaimie F Borisoff; Luc Noreau; Kathleen A Martin Ginis Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2017-04-26
Authors: Shivayogi V Hiremath; Amir Mohammad Amiri; Binod Thapa-Chhetry; Gretchen Snethen; Mary Schmidt-Read; Marlyn Ramos-Lamboy; Donna L Coffman; Stephen S Intille Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 3.240