Background: The Otago Exercise Program (OEP) is an evidence-based fall prevention program delivered by a physical therapist in 6 visits over a year. Despite documented effectiveness, there has been limited adoption of the OEP by physical therapists in the United States. To facilitate dissemination, 2 models have been developed: (1) the US OEP provided by a physical therapist or physical therapist assistant in the home or outpatient setting and (2) the community OEP provided by a non–physical therapist and a physical therapist consultant. It is unknown whether such modifications result in similar outcomes. Objective: The aims of this study were to identify the components of these 2 models, to compare participant characteristics for those components reached by each model, and to examine outcome changes by model and between models. Design: This was a translational cohort study with physical therapists implementing the US OEP and trained providers implementing the community OEP. Methods: Data for physical performance, sociodemographic characteristics, and self-perception of function were collected at baseline and at 8 weeks. Results: Participants in the community OEP were significantly younger and reported more falls compared with those in US OEP. Both sites reported significant improvements in most physical and self-reported measures of function, with larger effect sizes reported by the community OEP for the Timed “Up & Go” Test. There was no significant difference in improvements in outcome measures between sites. Limitations: This was an evaluation of a translational research project with limited control over delivery processes. The sample was 96% white, which may limit application to a more diverse population. Conclusion: Alternative, less expensive implementation models of the OEP can achieve results similar to those achieved with traditional methods, especially improvements in Timed “Up & Go” Test scores. The data suggest that the action of doing the exercises may be the essential element of the OEP, providing opportunities to develop and test new delivery models to ensure that the best outcomes are achieved by participants.
Background: The Otago Exercise Program (OEP) is an evidence-based fall prevention program delivered by a physical therapist in 6 visits over a year. Despite documented effectiveness, there has been limited adoption of the OEP by physical therapists in the United States. To facilitate dissemination, 2 models have been developed: (1) the US OEP provided by a physical therapist or physical therapist assistant in the home or outpatient setting and (2) the community OEP provided by a non–physical therapist and a physical therapist consultant. It is unknown whether such modifications result in similar outcomes. Objective: The aims of this study were to identify the components of these 2 models, to compare participant characteristics for those components reached by each model, and to examine outcome changes by model and between models. Design: This was a translational cohort study with physical therapists implementing the US OEP and trained providers implementing the community OEP. Methods: Data for physical performance, sociodemographic characteristics, and self-perception of function were collected at baseline and at 8 weeks. Results:Participants in the community OEP were significantly younger and reported more falls compared with those in US OEP. Both sites reported significant improvements in most physical and self-reported measures of function, with larger effect sizes reported by the community OEP for the Timed “Up & Go” Test. There was no significant difference in improvements in outcome measures between sites. Limitations: This was an evaluation of a translational research project with limited control over delivery processes. The sample was 96% white, which may limit application to a more diverse population. Conclusion: Alternative, less expensive implementation models of the OEP can achieve results similar to those achieved with traditional methods, especially improvements in Timed “Up & Go” Test scores. The data suggest that the action of doing the exercises may be the essential element of the OEP, providing opportunities to develop and test new delivery models to ensure that the best outcomes are achieved by participants.
Authors: Siobhan K McMahon; Beth Lewis; J Michael Oakes; Jean F Wyman; Weihua Guan; Alexander J Rothman Journal: West J Nurs Res Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 1.967
Authors: Karen L Barker; Jon Room; Ruth Knight; Susan J Dutton; Fran Toye; Jose Leal; Seamus Kent; Nicola Kenealy; Michael M Schussel; Gary Collins; David J Beard; Andrew Price; Martin Underwood; Avril Drummond; Elaine Cook; Sarah E Lamb Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Kristine M Erlandson; Long Zhang; Derek K Ng; Keri N Althoff; Frank J Palella; Lawrence A Kingsley; Lisa P Jacobson; Joseph B Margolick; Jordan E Lake; Todd T Brown Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Siobhan K McMahon; Beth A Lewis; Weihua Guan; Jean F Wyman; Alexander J Rothman Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-12-05 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Jennifer L Vincenzo; Colleen Hergott; Lori Schrodt; Subashan Perera; Jennifer Tripken; Tiffany E Shubert; Jennifer S Brach Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2021-06-25