A 10-week intergenerational program bringing together community-living older adults and preschool children (INTERACTION): a pilot feasibility non-randomised clinical trial.
Journal
Pilot and feasibility studies
ISSN: 2055-5784
Titre abrégé: Pilot Feasibility Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101676536
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Feb 2024
21 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
24
03
2023
accepted:
12
01
2024
medline:
22
2
2024
pubmed:
22
2
2024
entrez:
21
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Social isolation and low levels of physical activity are strong drivers for frailty, which is linked to poor health outcomes and transition to long-term care. Frailty is multifactorial, and thus an integrated approach is needed to maintain older adults' health and well-being. Intergenerational programs represent a novel multifactorial approach to target frailty, social isolation and physical decline but these have not yet been rigorously tested in Australia. Here, we present the results of our pilot study which aimed to test the feasibility of a 10-week intergenerational program between older adults and preschool children. A non-randomised wait-listed controlled trial was conducted. Participants were allocated to either the intervention or wait-list control group. The intervention group received 10 weekly 2-h intergenerational sessions led by trained child educators; the control group continued with their usual routine and received their intergenerational program after the 10-week control period. All participants were assessed at baseline and 10 weeks. The primary outcome was the feasibility and acceptability of the program including measures of recruitment eligibility, adherence and effective data collection across the multiple domains important for frailty, including functional mobility and balance, grip strength, cognitive function, mood, social engagement, quality of life and concerns about falling. Nineteen adults were included, with nine in the intervention and ten in the control group. A total of 42% of older adults screened were eligible, 75% of participants were present at each intervention session and the overall attrition rate was 21% (n = 4). The reasons for participant absence were primarily health-related. Missing data was minimal for the majority of assessments but more apparent for the cognitive testing where completion rates ranged from 53 to 79% for baseline tests and 73 to 100% for those who received follow-up testing. The high program compliance and low attrition show that a 10-week intergenerational program embedded in the local community, designed for community-living older adults and preschool children, is feasible and acceptable to older adults. Our next trial will test the efficacy of intergenerational programs in this setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Social isolation and low levels of physical activity are strong drivers for frailty, which is linked to poor health outcomes and transition to long-term care. Frailty is multifactorial, and thus an integrated approach is needed to maintain older adults' health and well-being. Intergenerational programs represent a novel multifactorial approach to target frailty, social isolation and physical decline but these have not yet been rigorously tested in Australia. Here, we present the results of our pilot study which aimed to test the feasibility of a 10-week intergenerational program between older adults and preschool children.
METHODS
METHODS
A non-randomised wait-listed controlled trial was conducted. Participants were allocated to either the intervention or wait-list control group. The intervention group received 10 weekly 2-h intergenerational sessions led by trained child educators; the control group continued with their usual routine and received their intergenerational program after the 10-week control period. All participants were assessed at baseline and 10 weeks. The primary outcome was the feasibility and acceptability of the program including measures of recruitment eligibility, adherence and effective data collection across the multiple domains important for frailty, including functional mobility and balance, grip strength, cognitive function, mood, social engagement, quality of life and concerns about falling.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Nineteen adults were included, with nine in the intervention and ten in the control group. A total of 42% of older adults screened were eligible, 75% of participants were present at each intervention session and the overall attrition rate was 21% (n = 4). The reasons for participant absence were primarily health-related. Missing data was minimal for the majority of assessments but more apparent for the cognitive testing where completion rates ranged from 53 to 79% for baseline tests and 73 to 100% for those who received follow-up testing.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The high program compliance and low attrition show that a 10-week intergenerational program embedded in the local community, designed for community-living older adults and preschool children, is feasible and acceptable to older adults. Our next trial will test the efficacy of intergenerational programs in this setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38383482
doi: 10.1186/s40814-024-01446-y
pii: 10.1186/s40814-024-01446-y
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
37Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Social isolation and loneliness among older people: advocacy brief. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
Noguchi T, et al. Association between community-level social capital and frailty onset among older adults: a multilevel longitudinal study from the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study (JAGES). J Epidemiol CommunHealth. 2022;76(2):182.
doi: 10.1136/jech-2021-217211
Kelly ME, et al. The impact of social activities, social networks, social support and social relationships on the cognitive functioning of healthy older adults: a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):259.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0632-2
pubmed: 29258596
pmcid: 5735742
Jiao D, et al. Changes in social relationships and physical functions in community-dwelling older adults. J Nurs Res. 2022;30(5):e228.
Mah J, et al. Do interventions reducing social vulnerability improve health in community dwelling older adults? A systematic review. Clin Interv Aging. 2022;17:447–65.
doi: 10.2147/CIA.S349836
pubmed: 35431543
pmcid: 9012306
Schrempft S, et al. Associations between social isolation, loneliness, and objective physical activity in older men and women. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):74.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6424-y
pubmed: 30651092
pmcid: 6335852
Holt-Lunstad J, et al. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10(2):227–37.
doi: 10.1177/1745691614568352
pubmed: 25910392
Penninkilampi R, et al. The association between social engagement, loneliness, and risk of dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Alzheimer’s Dis. 2018;66:1619–33.
doi: 10.3233/JAD-180439
Rockwood, K., et al., CCCDTD5: Reducing the risk of later-life dementia. Evidence informing the Fifth Canadian Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia (CCCDTD-5). Alzheimer’s Dement. 2020. 6(1): e12083.
Davies K, et al. The longitudinal relationship between loneliness, social isolation, and frailty in older adults in England: a prospective analysis. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2021;2(2):e70–7.
doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(20)30038-6
pubmed: 36098160
Kojima G, Aoyama R, Tanabe M. Associations between social isolation and physical frailty in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Direct Assoc. 2022;23(11):e3–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2022.06.012
Kojima G. Frailty as a predictor of hospitalisation among community-dwelling older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2016;70(7):722.
doi: 10.1136/jech-2015-206978
Kojima G. Frailty as a predictor of nursing home placement among community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2018;41(1):42–8.
Oliveira JS, et al. Evidence on physical activity and the prevention of frailty and sarcopenia among older people: a systematic review to inform the World Health Organization Physical Activity Guidelines. J Phys Activity Health. 2020;17(12):1247–58.
doi: 10.1123/jpah.2020-0323
Peters R, et al. Intergenerational Programmes bringing together community dwelling non-familial older adults and children: a systematic review. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2021;94:104356.
doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2021.104356
pubmed: 33567363
pmcid: 8439135
Peterat L, Mayer-Smith J. Farm friends: Exploring intergenerational environmental learning. [References]. J Intergener Relatsh. 2006;4(1):107–16.
DeVore S, Aeschlimann E. Song Partners for Kindergartens: An Intergenerational Program in Switzerland. J Intergener Relatsh. 2016;14(1):60–4.
Sakurai R, et al. Preventive effects of an intergenerational program on age-related hippocampal atrophy in older adults: the REPRINTS study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2018;33(2):e264–72.
doi: 10.1002/gps.4785
pubmed: 28857334
Yasunaga M, et al. Multiple impacts of an intergenerational program in Japan: evidence from the research on productivity through intergenerational sympathy project. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2016;16(S1):98–109.
doi: 10.1111/ggi.12770
pubmed: 27018288
Carlson MC, et al. Exploring the effects of an “everyday” activity program on executive function and memory in older adults: Experience Corps®. Gerontologist. 2008;48(6):793–801.
doi: 10.1093/geront/48.6.793
pubmed: 19139252
Hannon PO, Gueldner SH. The impact of short-term quality intergenerational contact on children’s attitudes toward older adults. J Intergener Relatsh. 2008;5(4):59–76.
Detmer MR, et al. Intergenerational music therapy: effects on literacy, physical functioning, self-worth, and interactions. J Intergener Relatsh. 2020;18(2):175–95.
Chippendale, T. and M. Boltz, Living legends: effectiveness of a program to enhance sense of purpose and meaning in life among community-dwelling older adults. Am J Occup Ther. 2015. 69(4): 6904270010p1-6904270010p11.
Herrmann D, et al. Benefits and risks of intergenerational program participation by senior citizens. Educ Gerontol. 2005;31(2):123–38.
doi: 10.1080/03601270590891522
Kenning, G., et al. Intergenerational practice in the community—what does the community think? Soc Sci. 2021. 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10100374 .
Zhong S, et al. Intergenerational communities: a systematic literature review of intergenerational interactions and older adults’ health-related outcomes. Soc Sci Med. 2020;264:113374.
doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113374
pubmed: 33017736
Ronzi S, et al. What is the impact on health and wellbeing of interventions that foster respect and social inclusion in community-residing older adults? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. Systematic Reviews. 2018;7(1):26.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0680-2
pubmed: 29382375
pmcid: 5789687
Krzeczkowska A, et al. A systematic review of the impacts of intergenerational engagement on older adults’ cognitive, social, and health outcomes. Ageing Res Rev. 2021;71:101400.
doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2021.101400
pubmed: 34237435
Eldridge SM, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ. 2016;355:i5239.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5239
pubmed: 27777223
pmcid: 5076380
Nasreddine ZS, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Ame Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(4):695–9.
doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
Service NSW. Working with children. 2022; Available from: https://www.service.nsw.gov.au/services/business-industries-and-employment/working-children .
Department of Education. Belonging, being & becoming: the early years learning framework for Australia V2.0. 2022; Available from: https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf .
Bohannon RW, et al. Reference values for adult grip strength measured with a Jamar dynamometer: a descriptive meta-analysis. Physiotherapy. 2006;92(1):11–5.
doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2005.05.003
Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, Glynn RJ, Berkman LF, Blazer DG, et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol. 1994;49(2):M85–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/49.2.m85 .
Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “up & go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991;39(2):142–8.
doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x
pubmed: 1991946
Cambridge Cognition, CANTAB® [Cognitive assessment software]. 2019.
Smith PJ, et al. A comparison of the Cambridge Automated Neuropsychological Test Battery (CANTAB) with “traditional” neuropsychological testing instruments. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2013;35(3):319–28.
doi: 10.1080/13803395.2013.771618
pubmed: 23444947
Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;54(6):1063–70.
Ware, J.E., Jr. and C.D. Sherbourne, The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992. 30(6): 473-483.
Lubben J, Blozik E, Gillmann G, Iliffe S, von Renteln Kruse W, Beck JC, Stuck AE. Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist. 2006;46:503–13.
Delbaere K, Smith ST, Lord SR. Development and initial validation of the iconographical falls efficacy scale. J Gerontol. 2011;66A(6):674–80.
doi: 10.1093/gerona/glr019
Woo J, Leung J, Morley JE. Comparison of frailty indicators based on clinical phenotype and the multiple deficit approach in predicting mortality and physical limitation. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012;60(8):1478–86.
doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04074.x
pubmed: 22861118
Lewis M, et al. Determining sample size for progression criteria for pragmatic pilot RCTs: the hypothesis test strikes back! Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2021;7(1):40.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-021-00770-x
pubmed: 33536076
pmcid: 7856754
Krumpal I. Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review. Qual Quant. 2013;47(4):2025–47.
doi: 10.1007/s11135-011-9640-9
Rockwood K, et al. Responsiveness of goal attainment scaling in a randomized controlled trial of comprehensive geriatric assessment. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(8):736–43.
doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00132-X
pubmed: 12954465
Lenzen SA, et al. Disentangling self-management goal setting and action planning: a scoping review. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0188822.
Nelis SM, et al. Goal-setting to promote a healthier lifestyle in later life: qualitative evaluation of the agewell trial. Clin Gerontol. 2018;41(4):335–45.
doi: 10.1080/07317115.2017.1416509
pubmed: 29308992
pmcid: 5942145
Thabane L, et al. A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10(1).
Gavelin HM, et al. Combined physical and cognitive training for older adults with and without cognitive impairment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ageing Res Rev. 2021;66:101232.
doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2020.101232
pubmed: 33249177
Wollesen B, et al. The effects of cognitive-motor training interventions on executive functions in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2020;17(1):9.
doi: 10.1186/s11556-020-00240-y
pubmed: 32636957
pmcid: 7333372
Bull FC, et al. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(24):1451.
doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955
pubmed: 33239350