Comparison of falls and cost-effectiveness of the group versus individually delivered Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) program: final results from the LiFE-is-LiFE non-inferiority trial

Exploring physical activity in people after stroke: a substudy of the Falls After Stroke Trial

PURPOSE

The Falls After Stroke Trial (FAST) intervention involves habit-forming functional exercise and mobility practice which may increase physical activity. This substudy of FAST explores physical activity in community-dwelling people after stroke comparing the FAST intervention to usual care.

METHODS

This study used a subset of 49 participants from a randomised trial. Outcome measures were taken at baseline, 6- and 12-months. The primary outcome was physical activity (step count, upright time and sedentary time, activPAL4™ micro).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine participants (80%) had valid primary outcome data at 6 months and 36 participants (73%) at 12 months. Compared to baseline, the experimental group completed 485 (95% CI -434 to 1405) more steps/day than the control group at 6 months and 724 (95% CI -239 to 1667) more steps/day at 12 months; and spent 36 (95% CI -46 to 118) fewer min/day in sedentary behaviour than the control group at 6 months and 34 (95% CI -51 to 119) fewer min/day at 12 months, although the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

FAST may improve physical activity more than usual care at 6- and 12-months but results are inconclusive. Further research could be conducted to confirm any benefit in a larger sample.

Budget impact analysis of a Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) program for older people in Germany: a Markov model based on data from the LiFE-is-LiFE trial

BACKGROUND

Fall prevention is important for healthy ageing, but the economic impact of fall prevention are scarcely investigated. A recent cost-effectiveness analysis compared a group-delivered Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise Program (gLiFE) with an individually-delivered program (LiFE) in community-dwelling people (aged ≥ 70 years) at risk of falling. In addition, the current study aimed to analyze the budget impact of LiFE and gLiFE, compared with standard care in Germany.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to reflect falls and associated care needs for community-dwelling persons over 5 years. The intervention effects of LiFE and gLiFE were shown to be equivalent in a non-inferiority trial, although the costs differed. Outpatient, inpatient, and intervention costs were assessed from a payer's perspective. The effect of parameter uncertainty was assessed in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The budget impact due to intervention costs was €510 million for LiFE and €186 million for gLiFE. Over five years, health care expenditures were €35,008 million for those receiving standard care, €35,416 million for those receiving LiFE, and €35,091 million for persons receiving gLiFE. Thereby, LiFE and gLiFE could prevent 2700 deaths and 648,000 falls over 5 years. Parameter uncertainties in the risk of falling, uptake of an intervention offer, and in the intervention effects had a major influence; thus cost savings for LiFE and gLiFE compared with standard care could be achieved for individuals with a high risk of falling.

CONCLUSIONS

The results revealed that cost savings for LiFE and gLiFE compared with standard care could only be achieved for individuals at high risk of falling, with gLiFE being superior to LiFE. Future research should consider benefits and aspects of fall prevention beyond falls (e.g., physical activity, social aspects, and personal preferences of participants).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was preregistered under underclinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT03462654) on 12th March 2018; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03462654 .

[Lifestyle-integrated functional exercise for fall prevention : How and why do walking characteristics change?]

BACKGROUND

The lifestyle-integrated functional exercise (LiFE) program has been shown to increase physical activity. It remains unclear, however, how these changes translate into long vs. short walking episodes.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work was to investigate changes in short vs. long walking episodes between baseline and 6‑month follow-up and to determine which factors are associated with these changes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a two-arm randomized noninferiority study with 309 older adults (mean age 78.7 ± 0.3 years; 73.5% female) at risk of falling who exercised either in a group (gLiFE; n = 153) or individually (LiFE; n = 156). Walking episodes were measured using activPAL 4micro sensors: a distinction was made between walking episodes < 10s, < 20s, and > 60 s. Changes in walking episodes between baseline and 6‑month follow-up were analyzed, including calculation of effect sizes (Cohen's d). Determinants of changes in the walking episodes were analyzed using multiple regression.

RESULTS

The walking episodes < 10s and < 20 s showed a significant increase in both intervention groups but not for > 60 s. The overall daily walking duration and average steps per day had an influence on changes in the walking episodes between baseline and 6 months. Parameters of objective and subjective function explained a very small but significant amount of the variance.

CONCLUSION

The LiFE program seems to work on a behavioral rather than on a functional level. By accumulating short walking episodes, large gains in physical activity can potentially be achieved. This can be of health-promoting benefit especially for persons living in institutional settings or for those who are cautious or even anxious to undertake longer walking episodes (e.g., outdoors).