Physical activity monitoring-based interventions in geriatric patients: a scoping review on intervention components and clinical applicability

Rieke Trumpf; Laura Elani Schulte; Henning Schroeder; Rasmus Tolstrup Larsen; Peter Haussermann; Wiebren Zijlstra; Tim Fleiner

doi:10.1186/s11556-023-00320-9

Physical activity monitoring-based interventions in geriatric patients: a scoping review on intervention components and clinical applicability

Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2023 May 18;20(1):10. doi: 10.1186/s11556-023-00320-9.

Authors

Rieke Trumpf^{1

2}, Laura Elani Schulte^{3

4}, Henning Schroeder⁴, Rasmus Tolstrup Larsen^{5

6}, Peter Haussermann⁴, Wiebren Zijlstra³, Tim Fleiner^{3

4

7}

Affiliations

¹ Institute of Movement and Sport Gerontology, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Muengersdorf 6, 50933, Cologne, Germany. r.trumpf@dshs-koeln.de.
² Department of Geriatric Psychiatry & Psychotherapy, LVR Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany. r.trumpf@dshs-koeln.de.
³ Institute of Movement and Sport Gerontology, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Muengersdorf 6, 50933, Cologne, Germany.
⁴ Department of Geriatric Psychiatry & Psychotherapy, LVR Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
⁵ Department of Public Health, Section of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
⁶ Department of Occupational- and Physiotherapy, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
⁷ Institute for Geriatric Research, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany.

Abstract

Objective: To identify and analyze the components applied in interventions using physical activity (PA) monitoring in geriatric patients and determine their feasibility and applicability.

Methods: A systematic search in six databases (PubMed, Embase, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and GeroLit) was conducted to identify studies reporting interventions that included the application of a PA monitor in adults aged ≥ 60 years with a clinical diagnosis. PA monitor interventions were analyzed regarding their feedback, goal-setting and behavior change technique (BCT) components. To determine the feasibility and applicability of interventions, the participants' adherence to the intervention, their experience as well as adverse events were analyzed.

Results: Seventeen eligible studies, applying 22 interventions, were identified. Studies included a total of 827 older patients with a median age of 70.2 years. In thirteen interventions (59%), the PA monitor was embedded in a structured behavioral intervention, an indication-specific intervention or usual care. Most frequently applied intervention components were goal setting and self-monitoring (n = 18), real-time PA monitor feedback complemented by feedback from the study team (n = 12), use of further BCTs (n = 18), and regular counseling with the study team (n = 19). Comprehensive information on the participants' intervention adherence and experience were reported for 15 (68%) and 8 (36%) interventions, respectively.

Conclusion: The components included in PA monitoring-based interventions varied considerably especially regarding the extent, frequency, and content of feedback, goal setting and BCTs counseling. Future research should evaluate which components are most effective and clinically applicable to promote physical activity in geriatric patients. To be able to precisely analyze the effects, trials should seek to report details on intervention components, adherence and adverse events, while future reviews may use the findings of this scoping review to conduct analyses with less heterogeneity in study characteristics and intervention strategies.

Keywords: Medical condition; Older adults; Personalized treatment; Physical activity tracker; Wearables.

Publication types

Review