Feasibility and effectiveness of an augmented prescribed exercise programme (APEP) on mobility in older medical patients in the acute setting - a randomised pilot study

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00011262

Enrollment

Registered

2016-10-27

Start date

2016-10-31

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2025-04-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

older medical patients in acute care R54

Interventions

Group 1: Participants of the intervention group receive usual care plus APEP (augmented prescribed exercise programme) until clinic discharge, for a maximum period of 3 weeks. Usual care consists of

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

65 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: - planned acute-geriatric stay of at least 2 weeks in the study hospital - acute medical care in context of the standard geriatric multi-modal intervention (German “Geriatrische Komplexbehandlung”, GFK) - walking ability (with or without walking aid, independent or with stand-by assistance): Functional Ambulation Categories (FAC) Score =3 (Mehrholz 2007) - limited mobility: Timed-Up-And-Go Test >9 seconds (Marks 2016)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: - significant cognitive impairment, which exceed slight cognitive impairment ((ICD-10-Code: F06.7) and/or relevant cognitive impairment, which is documented with a validated test of cognition (Mini Mental State Examination <18 points (Folstein 1983) and/or diagnosis of dementia - severe hearing impairment - severe visual impairment - language barrier (German) - acute psychiatric condition (e.g. delir) - initiated palliative care - any medical restriction for physiotherapeutic interventions (e.g. physical training) - no understanding of simple orders - baseline-assessment has not taken place in the first 5 days after hospital admission

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Feasibility: Process aspects, resource aspects, management aspects, scientific aspects (Thabane 2010) Effectiveness: Mobility assessed with the de Morton Morton Mobility Index (de Morton 2008, Braun 2015) after the intervention (assessed at discharge or a maximum of 3 weeks after the start of the intervention).	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Effectiveness: The secondary outcomes are assessed after the intervention (at discharge or after a maximum of 3 weeks after the start of the intervention). [1] Mobility/balance, assessed with the Timed Up And Go Test (Podsiadlo 1991, Marks 2016) and the Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility (Braun 2016). [2] Gait speed (Bongers 2015). [3] Fear of falling, assessed with the Falls Efficacy Scale International (Yardley 2005). [4] Frailty, assessed with the Frailty Index (Searle 2008). [5] Ambulation, assessed with the Functional Ambulation Categories (Mehrholz 2007). [6] Physical endurance, assessed with the 6 minute walk test (Enright 2003)	—

Measure

Time frame

Effectiveness: The secondary outcomes are assessed after the intervention (at discharge or after a maximum of 3 weeks after the start of the intervention). [1] Mobility/balance, assessed with the Timed Up And Go Test (Podsiadlo 1991, Marks 2016) and the Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility (Braun 2016). [2] Gait speed (Bongers 2015). [3] Fear of falling, assessed with the Falls Efficacy Scale International (Yardley 2005). [4] Frailty, assessed with the Frailty Index (Searle 2008). [5] Ambulation, assessed with the Functional Ambulation Categories (Mehrholz 2007). [6] Physical endurance, assessed with the 6 minute walk test (Enright 2003)

—

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactTobias Braun

Hochschule für Gesundheit, Bochum

tobias.braun@hs-gesundheit.de0234 77727 625

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 2, 2026