Background: Traditionally, exercise programmes for improving functional performance and reducing falls are organised as structured sessions. An alternative approach of integrating functional exercises into everyday tasks has emerged in recent years. Objectives: Summarising the current evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of interventions integrating functional exercise into daily life. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted including articles based on the following criteria: (1) individuals ≥60 years; (2) intervention studies of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRS); (3) using a lifestyle-integrated approach; (4) using functional exercises to improve strength, balance, or physical functioning; and (5) reporting outcomes on feasibility and/or effectiveness. Methodological quality of RCTs was evaluated using the PEDro scale. Results: Of 4,415 articles identified from 6 databases, 14 (6 RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. RCT quality was moderate to good. Intervention concepts included (1) the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) programme integrating exercises into everyday activities and (2) combined programmes using integrated and structured training. Three RCTs evaluated LiFE in community dwellers and reported significantly improved balance, strength, and functional performance compared with controls receiving either no intervention, or low-intensity exercise, or structured exercise. Two of these RCTs reported a significant reduction in fall rate compared with controls receiving either no intervention or low-intensity exercise. Three RCTs compared combined programmes with usual care in institutionalised settings and reported improvements for some (balance, functional performance), but not all (strength, falls) outcomes. NRS showed behavioural change related to LiFE and feasibility in more impaired populations. One NRS comparing a combined home-based programme to a gym-based programme reported greater sustainability of effects in the combined programme. Conclusions: This review provides evidence for the effectiveness of integrated training for improving motor performances in older adults. Single studies suggest advantages of integrated compared with structured training. Combined programmes are positively evaluated in institutionalised settings, while little evidence exists in other populations. In summary, the approach of integrating functional exercise into daily life represents a promising alternative or complement to structured exercise programmes. However, more RCTs are needed to evaluate this concept in different target populations and the potential for inducing behavioural change.

Background Selecting appropriate outcome measures for vulnerable, multimorbid, older patients with acute and chronic impairments poses specific challenges, which may have caused inconsistent findings of previous intervention trials on early inpatient rehabilitation in acutely hospitalized older patients. The aim of this review was to describe primary outcome measures that have been used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on early rehabilitation in acutely hospitalized older patients, to analyze their matching, and to evaluate the effects of matching on the main findings of these RCTs. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PEDro databases. Additional studies were identified through reference and citation tracking. Inclusion criteria were: RCT, patients aged ≥65 years, admission to an acute hospital medical ward (but not to an intensive medical care unit), physical exercise intervention (also as part of multidisciplinary programs), and primary outcome measure during hospitalization. Two independent reviewers extracted the data, assessed the methodological quality, and analyzed the matching of primary outcome measures to the intervention, study sample, and setting. Main study findings were related to the results of the matching procedure. Results Twenty-eight articles reporting on 24 studies were included. A total of 33 different primary outcome measures were identified, which were grouped into six categories: functional status, mobility status, hospital outcomes, adverse clinical events, psychological status, and cognitive functioning. Outcome measures differed considerably within each category and showed a large heterogeneity in their matching to the intervention, study sample, and setting. Outcome measures that specifically matched the intervention contents were more likely to document intervention-induced benefits. Mobility instruments seemed to be the most sensitive outcome measures to reveal such benefits. Conclusions This review highlights that the selection of outcome measures has to be highly specific to the intervention contents as this is a key factor to reveal benefits attributable to early rehabilitation in acutely hospitalized older patients. Inappropriate selection of outcome measures may represent a major cause of inconsistent findings reported on the effectiveness of early rehabilitation in this setting. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42017063978 . Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-019-1201-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A pilot observational study to analyze (in)activity and reasons for sedentary behavior of cognitively impaired geriatric acute inpatients Observation To gain context information patients were directlyobserved bythe method ofbehavioral mapping (NB). Each observation took place only on the following day of the patient's individual assessment. Obser-S274 Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie • Suppl 4 • 2019

In this group of moderately cognitively impaired rehabilitation patients the exercises were feasible mostly under supervised conditions and frequently included additional physical support. An adjustment of the LiFE exercises in this setting is required before a trial should be performed in the acute care setting.

Erratum to: Z Gerontol Geriat (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-018-1431-7 In the online version of this article the following acknowledgement was missing:"This study was supported by a doctoral scholarship from the Robert Bosch Foundation (RBS). The content is solely the responsibility of the ….