| Literature DB >> 27697880 |
Mark W Orme1, Amie E Weedon2, Dale W Esliger3, Paula M Saukko2, Mike D Morgan4, Michael C Steiner5, John W Downey6, Sally J Singh5, Lauren B Sherar7.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) marks a critical life event, which can lower patient quality of life and ability to perform daily activities. Patients with COPD tend to lead inactive and highly sedentary lifestyles, which may contribute to reductions in functional capacity. Targeting sedentary behaviour (SB) may be more attainable than exercise (at a moderate-to-vigorous intensity) for behaviour change in patients following an exacerbation. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a 2-week at-home intervention providing education and self-monitoring to reduce prolonged periods of SB in patients with COPD discharged following an acute exacerbation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients will be randomised into 1 of 3 conditions: usual care (control), education or education+feedback. The education group will receive information and suggestions about reducing long periods of sitting. The education+feedback group will receive real-time feedback on their sitting time, stand-ups and step count at home through an inclinometer linked to a smart device app. The inclinometer will also provide vibration prompts to encourage movement when the wearer has been sedentary for too long. Data will be collected during hospital admission and 2 weeks after discharge. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with patients in the intervention groups to explore patient experiences. Interviews with healthcare staff will also be conducted. All data will be collected January to August 2016. The primary outcomes are feasibility and acceptability, which will be assessed by qualitative interviews, uptake and drop-out rates, reasons for refusing the intervention, compliance, app usage and response to vibration prompts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The research ethics committee East Midlands Leicester-Central has provided ethical approval for the conduct of this study. The results of the study will be disseminated through appropriate conference proceedings and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13790881; Pre-results. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.Entities:
Keywords: physical activity; sedentary behaviour; self-monitoring
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27697880 PMCID: PMC5073551 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Flow of participants through the trial.
Figure 2The LUMO sensor.
Figure 3LUMO app panels showing: (A) proportion of the day spent standing, stepping, sitting and lying down; (B) daily number of sit-to-stand transitions; and (C) daily step count.
Outline of feasibility indicators
| Indicators | Data sources | Timing |
|---|---|---|
| Feasibility of patient screening and recruitment | Healthcare staff interviews, project records (eg, number of eligible patients missed) | Ongoing throughout the study |
| Number of eligible patients, number of patients screened, number of patients invited to take part, actual number of patients who consent to take part | Medical records and project records | Ongoing throughout the study |
| Number of patients who refuse, drop out or opt out | Patient requests, qualitative patient interviews, field notes | |
| Duration of intervention sessions (education and/or device training); patient engagement in the content | Audio recordings of the intervention sessions, qualitative patient interviews | Ongoing throughout the study |
| It is important to note whether there were any unintended side effects or outcomes from the intervention. For example, did patients start doing one particular activity but at the expense of another? Unexpected outcomes are not necessarily negative. For example, there may be unexpected positive health outcomes. | Qualitative patient interviews, medical notes | 2-week follow-up appointment |
| Hospital readmissions related to the study. For example, trying to move more resulting in a fall | Medical notes | Ongoing throughout the study |
| Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the intervention; likes/dislikes; suggested improvements | Qualitative patient interviews conducted by researcher with no involvement in intervention delivery to encourage honest opinions and feedback | 2-week follow-up appointment, analysis of app usage |
| Whether healthcare staff could envision the implementation of the intervention within routine care and what they would alter | Qualitative interviews with healthcare staff | Ongoing throughout the study |
| The number of telephone contacts and duration of telephone conversations with patients during follow-up beyond usual care | Project records | Ongoing throughout the study |