Search

To determine the criterion validity of the activPAL and ActiGraph for measuring steps and sitting/sedentary time, compared to observation, in people hospitalised following orthopaedic lower limb injury who were weight bearing (WB) (i.e., walking) or non-weight bearing (NWB) (i.e., hopping). Participants wore an activPAL and ActiGraph on the hip/thigh/unaffected (UA)/affected ankle (AA) while completing bouts of walking and sitting. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient, Bland–Altman methods, and ratio of agreement were used to compare device-measured to observed (videoed) step count, sitting/sedentary time. In 42 participants, the ActiGraph demonstrated excellent concordance with the observed step count when worn on the ankle (LCC 0.91–0.92) compared to the hip (LCC 0.56) in participants that were WB. The ActiGraph AA achieved the highest concordance (LCC 0.71) with observed steps in participants NWB. The activPAL had poor concordance with observed steps, particularly at slow gait speeds, in participants that were WB (LCC 0.38–0.46), however was less influenced by gait speed and had good concordance in NWB participants (LCC 0.52–0.69). The activPAL (LCC 0.79–0.88) and ActiGraph UA (LCC 0.94) showed excellent concordance with observed sitting and sedentary time, respectively. The ActiGraph worn at the ankle provided the most valid measure of steps in people who are WB and NWB following orthopaedic injury, while the activPAL was best for measuring sitting time.Implications for rehabilitationTo accurately measure both steps and sitting time in people with lower limb orthopaedic injuries, a combination of activity monitors should be used (i.e., ActiGraph for steps, activPAL for sitting time).The ActiGraph device when worn on the ankle demonstrated the strongest agreement with observed step count in people who were weight bearing and non-weight bearing.Caution is needed when using thigh- or hip-worn devices in people who walk slowly. To accurately measure both steps and sitting time in people with lower limb orthopaedic injuries, a combination of activity monitors should be used (i.e., ActiGraph for steps, activPAL for sitting time). The ActiGraph device when worn on the ankle demonstrated the strongest agreement with observed step count in people who were weight bearing and non-weight bearing. Caution is needed when using thigh- or hip-worn devices in people who walk slowly.

Purpose To integrate the evidence of gait aid prescription for improving spatiotemporal gait parameters, balance, safety, adherence to gait aid use, and reducing falls in community-dwelling older people. Methods Seven health databases were searched to June 2021. Experimental studies investigating gait aid prescription (provision and instruction for use) for older people, reporting gait parameters, balance, falls, and safety of or adherence to gait aid use was included. Mean differences with 95% confidence intervals of gait and balance outcomes in participants at the program's last follow-up were analyzed. The safety of and adherence to gait aid use were described. Results Eight studies were included (N = 555 older people). No meta-analyses could be performed. Five studies used a single gait aid instruction session. Gait aid prescription had inconsistent effects on gait velocity, and no reported benefits in reducing gait variability in older people with mobility problems or fall risks, including Parkinson's or Alzheimer's disease. No study investigated gait aid prescription on falls and balance performance. Effects on safety and adherence to gait aid use were unclear. Conclusion Research is needed to investigate the benefits of extensive gait aid training in older people with mobility problems, including those with dementia or high falls risk.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThere is little evidence currently addressing the benefits of gait aid prescription on gait and associated outcomes in older people with mobility problems or fall risks.Gait aid prescription yielded inconsistent effects on increasing gait velocity and did not appear to reduce gait variability in older people with mobility problems or fall risks, nor in those with Parkinson's disease or Alzheimer's disease.Clinicians may consider using a more extensive gait aid training approach to optimize learning of safe gait patterns and gait aid use, which may produce better outcomes.

To understand the factors that affect the management of people after serious injury in urban and regional settings, beyond hospital discharge from the perspectives of allied health professionals (AHPs).An exploratory qualitative study of AHPs caring for people with serious injuries post-hospital discharge in urban and regional areas of Victoria, Australia was completed. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were undertaken with AHPs and thematically analysed.Allied health professionals in urban and regional settings reported the benefits of a multi-disciplinary team to deliver high-quality care. However, a number of barriers to service delivery were identified that impacted on their ability to meet the needs of patients. These included insufficient psychological services, a shortage of available carers and an unmet need for external clinical support in regional areas. Communication between AHPs and other services, and care co-ordination of post-discharge services, was also highlighted as key areas to improve for optimal patient care.Factors that influenced optimal patient management included the availability of psychological and carer services, communication between health professionals and coordination of post-discharge care. The experiences of AHPs can offer practical suggestions to optimise service delivery and post-discharge care for people with serious injuries.Implications for RehabilitationAllied health professionals (AHPs) face a number of challenges in the provision of optimal care to people with serious injuries.Improving the availability of psychological support and attendant carers is needed in regional areas.A designated care coordinator role may assist people with serious injuries transitioning between hospital and home to engage with necessary services and reduce administrative burden for AHPs.Telehealth may provide facilitate improved communication between health professionals and support regional clinicians caring for people with complex injuries.

PURPOSE To investigate factors influencing provision of care and support to older adults with traumatic injury in Australia, from a health service and policy perspective. METHODS Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 16 clinicians, support providers, researchers, policy makers, and representatives from peak bodies in Australia, who had experience across injury, ageing, and disability sectors. A thematic analysis was performed using a framework approach. RESULTS Themes identified included prolonged injury recovery in older adults, limited accommodation options, restricted access to preventive care, escalating care needs over time, issues with siloed funding schemes and funding availability, and the need for advocacy to coordinate care across different schemes. Certain themes were specific to people who were older when injured. Others related to people who had acquired an injury at a younger age and were ageing with injury. However, most themes had relevance for both groups. CONCLUSIONS For older adults, this research has highlighted a range of cross-sector problems which impact upon the potential to recover from injury and to age well with injury. To improve the lives of older adults with injuries, Australia needs better coordinated system interfaces, shared funding models or packages of care across sectors, and improved advocacy and case management.Implications for rehabilitationTo address the lack of long-term, multi-disciplinary preventive care for age-related conditions and secondary complications in people with injuries, older adults may need more prolonged, or individualised, care following injury, episodic health checks, and a greater focus on long-term health care.Accessible and well-coordinated specialist housing and support responses, that offer timely access to health care professionals and carers trained in both ageing and disability, and enable greater support for "ageing in place", are required to manage changing care needs of people ageing with injury.There needs to be greater involvement of geriatricians, nurses, and allied health care professionals within the aged care sector in order to care for people with complex needs, including older adults with injury-related disability.To reduce gaps in care and support for injured older adults, Australia needs better coordinated system interfaces, shared funding models or packages of care across sectors.