BackgroundIt is estimated that people with dementia are approximately three times more likely to fracture their hip than sex and age matched controls. A report by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy found that this population have poor access to rehabilitation as inpatients and in the community. A recent scoping review found a paucity of research in this area, indeed there has been no qualitative research undertaken with physiotherapists.In order to address this evidence gap, the aim of this current study was to explore the experiences of physiotherapists treating this population.MethodsSemi-structured interviews with physiotherapists were undertaken in order to gain an in-depth understanding of how they manage this population. Physiotherapists were recruited from all over the UK and a purposive sampling strategy was employed. Thematic analysis was utilised.ResultsA total of 12 physiotherapists were interviewed, at which stage data saturation was reached as no new themes were emerging. The participants had a broad range of experience both in physical and mental health settings. Analysis identified three separate themes: challenges, “thinking outside the box” and realising potential.Physiotherapists felt significant pressures and challenges regarding many aspects of the management of this population. Mainly this was the result of pressures placed on them by guidelines and targets that may not be achievable or appropriate for those with dementia. The challenges and importance of risk taking was also highlighted for this population with an appreciation that standard treatment techniques may need adapting. “Rehabilitation potential” was highlighted as an important consideration, but challenging to determine.ConclusionInterventions for the management of people with dementia and hip fracture need to consider that a traditional biomedical physiotherapy approach may not be the most appropriate approach to use with this population. However physiotherapists reported feeling pressurised to conform to a biomedical approach.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-017-0474-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objectives To establish the evidence for rehabilitation interventions tested in populations of patients admitted to ICU and critical care with severe respiratory illness, and consider whether the evidence is generalizable to patients with COVID-19. Methods The authors undertook a rapid systematic review. Medline (via OvidSP), CINAHL Complete (via EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL (via Wiley), Epistemonikos (via Epistemonikos.org), PEDro (via pedro.org.au) and OTseeker (via otseeker.com) searched to 7 May 2020. The authors included systematic reviews, RCTs and qualitative studies involving adults with respiratory illness requiring intensive care who received rehabilitation to enhance or restore resulting physical impairments or function. Data were extracted by one author and checked by a second. TIDier was used to guide intervention descriptions. Study quality was assessed using Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tools. Results Six thousand nine hundred and three titles and abstracts were screened; 24 systematic reviews, 11 RCTs and eight qualitative studies were included. Progressive exercise programmes, early mobilisation and multicomponent interventions delivered in ICU can improve functional independence. Nutritional supplementation in addition to rehabilitation in post-ICU hospital settings may improve performance of activities of daily living. The evidence for rehabilitation after discharge from hospital following an ICU admission is inconclusive. Those receiving rehabilitation valued it, engendering hope and confidence. Conclusions Exercise, early mobilisation and multicomponent programmes may improve recovery following ICU admission for severe respiratory illness that could be generalizable to those with COVID-19. Rehabilitation interventions can bring hope and confidence to individuals but there is a need for an individualised approach and the use of behaviour change strategies. Further research is needed in post-ICU settings and with those who have COVID-19. Registration: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/prc2y

BackgroundMany interventions aim to alleviate well-documented problems of malnutrition in residential care homes and improve residents’ health and wellbeing. Despite some positive findings, little is known about how and why mealtime interventions might be effective, and in particular, what effects residents’ experiences of mealtimes have on health outcomes. The aim of this study was to gain an insight into these experiences and explore some of the issues that may impact on residents’ enjoyment of meals, and resulting health and wellbeing.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with eleven residents from four care homes in the South West UK. Thematic analysis was used to derive content and meaning from transcribed interviews. Interviews were supplemented by researcher observations of mealtimes.ResultsThe dining experience was a focal point for participants’ broader experiences of residing in a care home. Three themes pertaining to residents’ experiences were identified: (1) Emotional and psychological connections with other residents; (2) managing competing interests with limited resources; and (3) familiarity and routine.ConclusionMealtimes are a mainstay of life in a care home through which residents’ experiences are characterised, exemplified and magnified. Understanding how residents interact with one another, accommodating their preferences and encouraging autonomy may enhance their mealtime experiences. It may also help to ease the transition from independent-living to life in care, which can be particularly stressful for some residents, and improve health and wellbeing over the long-term.

ObjectiveTo establish the current evidence base for the use of orthotics and taping for people with osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF).DesignSystematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.Data sourcesMedline, Medline-In Process, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PEDro, TRIP, EThOS, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and Cochrane (CDSR, DARE, CMR, HTA, EED) plus Cochrane Central, UK Clinical Research Network portfolio, Controlled Clinical Trials register and the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials register.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesAll study designs were considered if they reported in English and evaluated the impact of using an external support, such as a spinal brace, orthosis or postural tape, with adults with OVF. All outcomes were considered.ResultsNine studies were included comprising two parallel-group randomised controlled trials, four randomised cross-over trials, two before-after (single arm) studies and a parallel group observational study. No qualitative studies were identified. A wide range of outcomes assessing impairments, activities and participation were assessed but the findings were mixed. The quality of studies was limited.ConclusionsThe current evidence for using orthotic devices or taping for people with OVF is inconsistent and of limited quality and therefore careful consideration should be taken by clinicians before prescribing them in practice.Systematic review registration numberCRD42015020893.

Background Physiotherapy is a core component of rehabilitation following a hip fracture. Approximately 40% of people sustaining a hip fracture will have dementia, but there is little evidence to guide physiotherapy interventions in this population. Objective This study forms part of a process evaluation seeking to explore reasons why people with dementia were not referred for physiotherapy following a hip fracture and challenges that are faced treating these people in the community. Methods We undertook a series of structured focus groups and interviews with physiotherapists based in community-rehabilitation services in the South West of England. Qualitative data sought to explain reasons why people with dementia were not being referred for onward physiotherapy following discharge from the acute setting after hip fracture. Framework analysis was used to make sense of the data. Results Four focus groups and interviews were undertaken with physiotherapists and assistants working in community settings. Three main themes were determined – beliefs, the importance of pathways of care and the effect of resources on decision making. Discussion Out data suggest that people with dementia were often labelled as having ‘no rehabilitation potential’ in the acute setting and this excluded them from receiving ongoing therapy in the community setting. It was also suggested that physiotherapists were judging this potential using biomedical measures of outcome which fails to recognise the importance of person centred care for this population. Conclusion There was suggestion of therapeutic nihilism when considering rehabilitation for this population, whereby it is assumed that people with dementia cannot be rehabilitated, so they are not given the opportunity. It is unsurprising that outcomes for this population are poor considering the reluctance to provide physiotherapy to people with dementia following hip fracture.

BackgroundPeople with dementia may receive physiotherapy for a variety of reasons. This may be for musculoskeletal conditions or as a result of falls, fractures or mobility difficulties. While previous studies have sought to determine the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions for people with dementia, little research has focused on the experiences of people receiving such treatment. The aim of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of people’s experiences of receiving physiotherapy and to explore these experiences in the context of principles of person-centred care.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were undertaken with people with dementia or their carers between September 2016 and January 2017. A purposive sampling strategy recruited participants with dementia from the South West of England who had recently received physiotherapy. We also recruited carers to explore their involvement in the intervention. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsA total of eleven participants were recruited to the study. Six people with dementia were interviewed and five interviews undertaken separately with carers of people with dementia. Three themes were identified. The first explores the factors that enable exercises to be undertaken successfully, the second deals with perceived resource pressures, and the final theme “the physiotherapy just vanished” explores the feeling of abandonment felt when goals and expectations of physiotherapy were not discussed. When mapped against the principles of person-centred care, our participants did not describe physiotherapy adopting such an approach.ConclusionLack of a person-centred care approach was evident by ineffective communication, thus failing to develop a shared understanding of the role and aims of physiotherapy. The incorporation of person-centred care may help reduce the frustration and feelings of dissatisfaction that some of our participants reported.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-018-0756-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Low physical activity levels are a major problem for people in hospital and are associated with adverse outcomes. Objective This systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression aimed to determine the effect of behaviour change interventions on physical activity levels in hospitalised patients. Methods Randomised controlled trials of behaviour change interventions to increase physical activity in hospitalised patients were selected from a database search, supplemented by reference list checking and citation tracking. Data were synthesised with random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses, applying Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. The primary outcome was objectively measured physical activity. Secondary measures were patient-related outcomes (e.g. mobility), service level outcomes (e.g. length of stay), adverse events and patient satisfaction. Results Twenty randomised controlled trials of behaviour change interventions involving 2,568 participants (weighted mean age 67 years) included six trials with a high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that behaviour change interventions increased physical activity levels (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.14–0.55). Findings in relation to mobility and length of stay were inconclusive. Adverse events were poorly reported. Meta-regression found behaviour change techniques of goal setting (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.05–0.53) and feedback (excluding high risk of bias trials) (SMD 0.35, 95% CI 0.11–0.60) were independently associated with increased physical activity. Conclusions Targeted behaviour change interventions were associated with increases in physical activity in hospitalised patients. The trials in this review were inconclusive in relation to the patient-related or health service benefits of increasing physical activity in hospital.

The findings of this scoping review suggest there is limited evidence to guide physiotherapists in the management of people with dementia who fracture their hip. No evidence was found about perceptions or experiences of patients in this group or of the physiotherapists involved in their care. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate physiotherapy interventions for people with dementia who fracture their hip.