基本情報/Basic information |
一般向け試験名/Public title |
特定高齢者の介護予防における作業療法的介入の導入効果の研究 |
Study about effects of life goal setting technique in the care prevention program for elderly |
一般向け試験名略称/Acronym |
地域在住の虚弱(二次予防対象)高齢者に対する介護予防教室における生活目標設定手法の導入効果に関する研究:集団非ランダム化比較試験 |
The effects of a life goal-setting technique in a preventive care program for frail community-dwelling older people: a cluster nonrandomized controlled trial |
科学的試験名/Scientific Title |
特定高齢者の介護予防における作業療法的介入の導入効果の研究 |
Study about effects of life goal setting technique in the care prevention program for elderly |
科学的試験名略称/Scientific Title:Acronym |
地域在住の虚弱(二次予防対象)高齢者に対する介護予防教室における生活目標設定手法の導入効果に関する研究:集団非ランダム化比較試験 |
The effects of a life goal-setting technique in a preventive care program for frail community-dwelling older people: a cluster nonrandomized controlled trial |
試験実施地域/Region |
|
評価/Assessment |
主要アウトカム評価項目/Primary outcomes |
虚弱(二次予防対象)高齢者(厚生労働者作成の基本チェックリストによる)からの改善割合
評価の時期:介護予防教室の開始時、終了時(3か月後)、6、9か月後
|
Health improvement according to the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare's "Kihon Checklists" for assessment of frailty
Assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months.
|
副次アウトカム評価項目/Key secondary outcomes |
生活の質(QOL)、身体機能(握力、長座体前屈、Timed Up-and-Go テスト)、生活目標の認識度・達成度・満足度
評価の時期:
生活の質(QOL)は、介護予防教室開始時、終了時(3か月後)、6,9か月後
身体機能測定値は、介護予防教室開始時と終了時(3か月後)のみ
生活目標は、介護予防教室終了時(3か月後)、6,9月後
|
Quality of life (QOL), physical functions (grip strength, sit and reach and Timed Up-and-Go test) and assessment of life goals (degree of recognition, achievement and satisfaction).
QOL are assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months.
Physical functions are assessed at baseline and 3months.
Life goals are assessed at 3,6 and 9 months.
|
介入/Intervention |
群数/No. of arms |
2 |
介入の目的/Purpose of intervention |
予防・検診・検査/Prevention |
介入の種類/Type of intervention |
|
介入1/Interventions/Control_1 |
介入群:通常の介護予防教室に参加し、介入群は作業療法士による生活目標設定手法(LGST)の介入を介護予防教室の開始時と終了時に2回受ける。 |
Intervention group: Participants in the life goal-setting technique (LGST) group received life goal-setting supports from the occupational therapists, as well as standard care at the beginning and end of the classroom program. |
介入2/Interventions/Control_2 |
対照群:通常の介護予防教室に参加する。 |
Control group: Participants were encouraged to take regular exercise. |
介入3/Interventions/Control_3 |
|
|
介入4/Interventions/Control_4 |
|
|
介入5/Interventions/Control_5 |
|
|
介入6/Interventions/Control_6 |
|
|
介入7/Interventions/Control_7 |
|
|
介入8/Interventions/Control_8 |
|
|
介入9/Interventions/Control_9 |
|
|
介入10/Interventions/Control_10 |
|
|
適格性/Eligibility |
年齢(下限)/Age-lower limit |
|
年齢(上限)/Age-upper limit |
|
性別/Gender |
男女両方/Male and Female |
選択基準/Key inclusion criteria |
大阪府和泉市に在住の65歳以上の高齢者で、厚生労働省作成の基本チェックリストにより、虚弱(二次予防対象)高齢者と判定され、2010年10月から2014年3月に実施する介護予防教室の参加を希望する者。 |
Those eligible were older people aged 65 or over living in the community in Izumi, Osaka, Japan, who were assessed as frail using the MHLW's "Kihon Checklist". They were invited to join a care prevention program between octpber 2010 and March 2014. And they decided to participate in a care prevention program for own intention. |
除外基準/Key exclusion criteria |
1)要介護認定を受けた者 2)過去2年間に介護予防教室に参加したことがある者 3)12回の教室のうち5回以上欠席した者(66.6%以下の参加率) 4)生活目標の設定日に欠席した者 5)追跡調査の郵便を返送しなかった者 |
1) receiving certification for long-term care; 2) having participated in a preventive care program within past 2 years; 3) missing more than five classes out of 12 (an overall attendance rate less than 66.6%); 4) absent on the day of life goal-setting; and 5) not returning the postal questionnaire. |
目標参加者数/Target sample size |
300 |
結果/Result |
結果掲載URL/URL related to results and publications |
|
組み入れ参加者数/Number of participants that the trial has enrolled |
|
主な結果/Results |
虚弱(二次予防対象)高齢者からの改善割合(基本チェックリストの基準)について、介入群はおよそ60%で維持し、対照群はおよそ40%で維持した。統計的には教室終了時(3か月後)は(P=0.043)、6か月後は(p=0.015)で有意な差があり、9か月後は(P=0.098)で差はなかった。
QOLは2WAY-ANOVA で交互作用があった(p=0.022)。ポストテストでは、教室終了時(3か月後)にのみ有意差があったが以降はなかった。
|
The improvement on the Kihon Checklist for the intervention group was approximately 60% from baseline to 9-months follow-up;the control group improved by approximately 40%. The difference between groups was significant at 3-month (p = 0.043) and 6-month (p = 0.015)follow-ups but not at 9-month (p = 0.098) follow-up. Analysis of QOL yielded a significant time group interaction effect (p = 0.022). The effect was significant at 3 months in the intervention group, but at no time in the control group. |
主な結果入力日/Results date posted |
|
結果掲載遅延/Results Delayed |
|
結果遅延理由/Results Delay Reason |
|
|
最初の試験結果の出版日/Date of the first journal publication of results |
|
参加者背景/Baseline Characteristics |
|
|
参加者の流れ/Participant flow |
|
|
有害事象/Adverse events |
|
|
評価項目/Outcome measures |
|
|
個別症例データ共有計画/Plan to share IPD |
|
|
個別症例データ共有計画の詳細/IPD sharing Plan description |
|
|