| Title |
Targeting functional fitness, hearing and health-related quality of life in older adults with hearing loss: Walk, Talk 'n' Listen, study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trials, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13063-017-1792-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Justin Lambert, Rouzbeh Ghadry-Tavi, Kate Knuff, Marc Jutras, Jodi Siever, Paul Mick, Carolyn Roque, Gareth Jones, Jonathan Little, Harry Miller, Colin Van Bergen, Donna Kurtz, Mary Ann Murphy, Charlotte Ann Jones |
| Abstract |
Hearing loss (HL) is a disability associated with poorer health-related quality of life including an increased risk for loneliness, isolation, functional fitness declines, falls, hospitalization and premature mortality. The purpose of this pilot trial is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a novel intervention to reduce loneliness, improve functional fitness, social connectedness, hearing and health-related quality of life in older adults with HL. This 10-week, single-blind, pilot randomized control trial (RCT) will include a convenience sample of ambulatory adults aged 65 years or older with self-reported HL. Following baseline assessments, participants will be randomized to either intervention (exercise, health education, socialization and group auditory rehabilitation (GAR)) or control (GAR only) groups. The intervention group will attend a local YMCA twice a week and the control group once a week. Intervention sessions will include 45 min of strengthening, balance and resistance exercises, 30 min of group walking at a self-selected pace and 60 min of interactive health education or GAR. The control group will attend 60-min GAR sessions. GAR sessions will include education about hearing, hearing technologies, enhancing communication skills, and psychosocial support. Pre-post trial data collection and measures will include: functional fitness (gait speed, 30-s Sit to Stand Test), hearing and health-related quality of life, loneliness, depression, social participation and social support. At trial end, feasibility (recruitment, randomization, retention, acceptability) and GAR will be evaluated. Despite evidence suggesting that HL is associated with declines in functional fitness, there are no studies aimed at addressing functional fitness declines associated with the disability of HL. This pilot trial will provide knowledge about the physical, mental and social impacts on health related to HL as a disability. This will inform the feasibility of a larger RCT and preliminary evidence about the initial effects of a novel, community-based, holistic intervention addressing both the negative psychosocial and functional physical effects of HL among older adults. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02662192 . Registered on 14 January 2016. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 406 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 405 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 60 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 52 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 10% |
| Researcher | 23 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 5% |
| Other | 65 | 16% |
| Unknown | 143 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 84 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 30 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 6% |
| Psychology | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 12% |
| Unknown | 156 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#21,157,205
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,551
of 1,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#326,085
of 427,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#30
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 427,198 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.