Randomised controlled trial of unsolicited occupational therapy in community-dwelling elderly people: the LOTIS trial.

PLoS clinical trials Pub Date : 2006-05-01 Epub Date: 2006-04-21 DOI:10.1371/journal.pctr.0010002
Anton J M de Craen, Jacobijn Gussekloo, Gerard J Blauw, Charles G Willems, Rudi G J Westendorp
{"title":"Randomised controlled trial of unsolicited occupational therapy in community-dwelling elderly people: the LOTIS trial.","authors":"Anton J M de Craen,&nbsp;Jacobijn Gussekloo,&nbsp;Gerard J Blauw,&nbsp;Charles G Willems,&nbsp;Rudi G J Westendorp","doi":"10.1371/journal.pctr.0010002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this trial, the Leiden 85-Plus Occupational Therapy Intervention Study (LOTIS), was to assess whether unsolicited occupational therapy, as compared to no therapy, can decelerate the increase in disability in high-risk elderly people.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was a randomised controlled trial with 2-y follow-up.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study took place in the municipality of Leiden in the Netherlands.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>The participants were 402 community-dwelling 85-y-old people, with a Mini-Mental State Examination score of >18 points at baseline.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Participants in the intervention group were visited by an occupational therapist who provided training and education about assistive devices that were already present and who gave recommendations and information about procedures, possibilities, and costs of assistive devices and community-based services. Control participants were not visited by an occupational therapist.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome measure was the score achieved on the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. Secondary outcome measures included self-evaluations of well-being and feelings of loneliness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>THE PARTICIPANTS WERE EVENLY DIVIDED BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS: 202 participants were allocated to the intervention group and 200 participants to the control group. Of the 202 participants randomised to occupational therapy, 55 participants declined the proposed intervention. An occupational therapist indicated that of the remaining 147 participants, 66 (45%) needed an occupational therapy intervention. A total of 44 new assistive devices and five community-based services were implemented. During follow-up there was a progressive increase in disability in the intervention group (mean annual increase, 2.0 points; SE 0.2; p < 0.001) and control group (mean annual increase, 2.1 points; SE 0.2; p < 0.001). The increase in disability was not significantly different between study groups (0.08 points; 95% CI, -1.1-1.2; p = 0.75). There was also no difference between study groups for any of the secondary outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Unsolicited occupational therapy in high-risk elderly participants does not decelerate the increase in disability over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":87416,"journal":{"name":"PLoS clinical trials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1371/journal.pctr.0010002","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS clinical trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pctr.0010002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2006/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this trial, the Leiden 85-Plus Occupational Therapy Intervention Study (LOTIS), was to assess whether unsolicited occupational therapy, as compared to no therapy, can decelerate the increase in disability in high-risk elderly people.

Design: This was a randomised controlled trial with 2-y follow-up.

Setting: The study took place in the municipality of Leiden in the Netherlands.

Participants: The participants were 402 community-dwelling 85-y-old people, with a Mini-Mental State Examination score of >18 points at baseline.

Interventions: Participants in the intervention group were visited by an occupational therapist who provided training and education about assistive devices that were already present and who gave recommendations and information about procedures, possibilities, and costs of assistive devices and community-based services. Control participants were not visited by an occupational therapist.

Outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the score achieved on the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. Secondary outcome measures included self-evaluations of well-being and feelings of loneliness.

Results: THE PARTICIPANTS WERE EVENLY DIVIDED BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS: 202 participants were allocated to the intervention group and 200 participants to the control group. Of the 202 participants randomised to occupational therapy, 55 participants declined the proposed intervention. An occupational therapist indicated that of the remaining 147 participants, 66 (45%) needed an occupational therapy intervention. A total of 44 new assistive devices and five community-based services were implemented. During follow-up there was a progressive increase in disability in the intervention group (mean annual increase, 2.0 points; SE 0.2; p < 0.001) and control group (mean annual increase, 2.1 points; SE 0.2; p < 0.001). The increase in disability was not significantly different between study groups (0.08 points; 95% CI, -1.1-1.2; p = 0.75). There was also no difference between study groups for any of the secondary outcome measures.

Conclusion: Unsolicited occupational therapy in high-risk elderly participants does not decelerate the increase in disability over time.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

社区老年人主动职业治疗的随机对照试验:LOTIS试验。
目的:Leiden 85-Plus职业治疗干预研究(LOTIS)的目的是评估与不接受治疗相比,主动接受职业治疗是否能减缓高危老年人残疾的增加。设计:这是一项随机对照试验,随访2年。环境:研究在荷兰莱顿市进行。参与者:参与者为402名社区居住的85岁老年人,基本精神状态检查得分>18分。干预措施:一名职业治疗师对干预组的参与者进行了访问,该职业治疗师对已经存在的辅助设备进行了培训和教育,并就辅助设备和社区服务的程序、可能性和成本提供了建议和信息。对照组的参与者没有接受职业治疗师的拜访。结果测量:主要结果测量指标为格罗宁根活动限制量表得分。次要结果测量包括幸福感和孤独感的自我评估。结果:参与者被平均分为两组:干预组202人,对照组200人。在202名随机分配到职业治疗组的参与者中,55名参与者拒绝了提议的干预。一位职业治疗师指出,在剩下的147名参与者中,有66名(45%)需要职业治疗干预。总共实施了44个新的辅助器具和5个社区服务。在随访期间,干预组的残疾程度逐渐增加(平均每年增加2.0点;SE 0.2;P < 0.001)和对照组(平均每年增加2.1点;SE 0.2;P < 0.001)。残疾的增加在研究组之间没有显著差异(0.08分;95% ci, -1.1-1.2;P = 0.75)。在任何次要结果测量中,研究组之间也没有差异。结论:对高风险的老年参与者进行主动的职业治疗并不能减缓残疾的增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信