Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

, Volume 21, Issue 4–5, pp 314–322 | Cite as

A Nordic multi-center study on physical and daily activities for residents in nursing home settings: design of a randomized, controlled trial

  • Kerstin Frändin
  • Lena Borell
  • Helena Grönstedt
  • Astrid Bergland
  • Jorunn L. Helbostad
  • Lis Puggaard
  • Mette Andresen
  • Randi Granbo
  • Karin Hellström
Original Article


Background and aims: Nursing home residents constitute a frail, multi-diseased and heterogeneous group. As physical activity is essential for the preservation of function, personalized training and activities are of great importance. The main objective of this study was to describe the influence of an individually tailored intervention program, in a nursing home setting, on physical capacity, degree of dependence in Activities of Daily Living (ADL), long-term participation in physical and/or daily activities, and self-rated wellbeing. The aim of the present work is to describe the overall design of the study. Methods: Nursing homes in Sweden, Norway and Denmark were involved, and 322 residents were randomized to either Intervention or Control groups. The intervention lasted for three months and consisted of physical and daily activities, led by physiotherapists and occupational therapists, and was built on their evaluations and on the goals expressed by each resident. Tests of muscle strength, mobility, balance function and confidence, ADL, level of physical activity, wellbeing and cognitive function were performed at baseline, directly after the intervention period and three months later. Results: They will be presented in articles to follow. Conclusions: Although it is a great challenge to carry out an intervention study directed toward such a frail population, it is of great interest to find out whether individually tailored and enhanced activities can lead to decreased dependence in ADL and increased wellbeing.


ADL elderly nursing home physical performance randomized controlled trial rehabilitation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The National Board of Health and Welfare. Vad är särskilt i särskilt boende? En kartläggning. Stockholm: 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bentzen H, Forsen L, Becker C, Bergland A. Uptake and adherence with soft- and hard-shelled hip protectors in Norwegian nursing homes: a cluster randomised trial. Osteoporos Int 2008; 19: 101–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Selbaek G, Kirkevold Ø, Engedal K. The prevalence of psychiatric symptoms and behavioural disturbances and the use of psychotropic drugs in Norwegian nursing homes. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007; 22: 843–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gunnersen SJ, Bisgaard PB (eds). Statististical Yearbook. Copenhagen: Scanprint, 2007 (
  5. 5.
    Bauman AE, Smith BJ. Healthy ageing: what role can physical activity play? MJA 2000; 173: 88–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Light KE. Information processing for motor performance in aging adults. Phys Ther 1990; 70: 820–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lowenthal DT, Kirschner DA, Scarpace NH, Pollock M, Graves J. Effects of exercise on age and disease. South Med J 1994; 87: S5–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fiatarone Singh MA. Exercise comes of age. Rationale and recommendations for a geriatric exercise prescription. J Gerontol 2002; 57A: M262–82.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fiatarone MA, Marks EC, Ryan ND, Meredith CN, Lipsitz LA, Evans WJ. High-intensity strength training in nonagenarians. Effects on skeletal muscle. JAMA 1990; 263: 3029–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lexell J, Downham DY, Larsson Y, Bruhn E, Morsing B. Heavy-resistance training in older Scandinavian men and women: short- and long-term effects on arm and leg muscles. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1995; 5: 329–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mazzeo RS, Cavanagh P, Evans WJ et al. Exercise and physical activity for older adults. Position stand. Am Coll Sports Med 1998; 30: 992–1008.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Judge JO, Lindsey C, Underwood M, Winsemius D. Balance improvements in older women: effects of exercise training. Phys Ther 1993; 73: 254–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Helbostad J, Sletvold O, Moe-Nilssen R. Effects of home exercises and group training on functional abilities in home-dwelling older persons with mobility- and balance problems. A randomized study. Aging Clin Exp Res 2004; 85: 993–9.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morgan K, Bath PA. Customary physical activity and psychological wellbeing: a longitudinal study. Age Ageing 1998; 27 (Suppl 3): S35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Laurin D, Verreault R, Lindsay J, MacPherson K, Rockwood K. Physical activity and risk of cognitive impairment and dementia in elderly persons. Arch Neurol 2001; 58: 498–504.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mangani I, Cesari M, Russo A, et al. Physical function, physical activity and recent falls. Results from the “Invecchiamento e Longevità nel Sirente (ilSIRENTE)” Study. Aging Clin Exp Res 2008; 20: 234–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Przybylski BR, Dumont ED, Watkins ME, Warren SA, Beaulne AP, Lier DA. Outcomes of enhanced physical and occupational therapy service in a nursing home setting. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 554–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lazowski DA, Ecclestone NA, Myers AM et al. A randomized outcome evaluation of group exercise programs in long-term care institutions. J Gerontol 1999; 54: M621–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morris JN, Fiatarone M, Kiely DK et al. Nursing rehabilitation and exercise strategies in the nursing home. J Gerontol 1999; 54: M494–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rydwik E, Frändin K, Akner G. Effects of physical training on physical performance in institutionalised elderly patients (70+) with multiple diagnoses. Systematic review. Age Ageing 2004; 33: 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rosendahl E, Gustafson Y, Nordin E, Lundin-Olsson L, Nyberg L. A randomized controlled trial of fall prevention by a high-intensity functional exercise program for older people living in residential care facilities. Aging Clin Exp Res 2008; 20: 67–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murray P, Singer M, Fortinsky R, Russo L, Cebul R. Rapid growth of rehabilitation services in traditional community based nursing homes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 372–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kosasih J, Borca H, Wenninger W, Duthie E. Nursing home rehabilitation after acute rehabilitation: predictors and outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 670–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rydwik E, Lammes E, Frändin K, Akner G. Effects of a physical and nutritional intervention program for frail elderly people over age 75. A randomized controlled pilot treatment trial. Aging Clin Exp Res 2008; 20: 159–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nowalk MP, Prendergast JM, Bayles CM, D’Amico FJ, Colvin GC. A randomized trial of exercise programs among older individuals living in two long-term care facilites: the FallsFREE Program. J Am Geriatr Soc 2001; 49: 859–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kolanowski A, Buettner L, Litaker M, Yu F. Factors that relate to activity engagement in nursing home residents. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2006; 21: 15–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kocherberger G, Hielema F, Westerlund R. Rehabilitation in the nursing home; how much, why, and with what results. Public Health Reports 1994; 109: 372–6.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cardol M, De Jong BB, Ward CD. On autonomy and participation in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2002; 24: 970–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Oberg B. Intra- and inter-tester reliability and reference values for handgrip strength. J Rehabil Med 2001; 33: 36–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bellace JV, Healy D, Besser MP, Byron T, Hohman L. Validity of the Dexter Evaluation System’s Jamar Dynamometer attachment for assessment of hand grip strength in a normal population. J Hand Ther 2000; 13: 46–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: Association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol 1994; 49: M85–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jette AM, Jette DU, Ng J, Plotkin DJ, Bach MA. Are performance-based measures sufficiently reliable for use in multicenter trials? Musculoskeletal Impairment (MSI) Study Group. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1999; 54: M3–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Whitney SL, Wrisley DM, Marchetti GF, Gee MA, Redfern MS, Furman JM. Clinical measurement of sit-to-stand performance in people with balance disorders: validity of data for the five-times-sit-to-stand test. Phys Ther 2005; 85: 1034–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Connelly DM, Stevenson TJ, Vandervoort AA. Between- and within-rater reliability of walking tests in a frail elderly population. Physiother Can 1996; 48: 47–51.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI, Gayton D. Measuring balance in the elderly: preliminary development of an instrument. Physiother Can 1989; 41: 304–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI. The Balance scale: reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke. Scand J Rehabil Med 1995; 27: 27–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Berg K, Maki BE, Williams JI, Holliday PJ, Wood-Dauphinee S. Clinical and laboratory measures of postural balance in an elderly population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73: 1073–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tinetti ME, Richman D, Powell L. Falls efficacy as a measure of fear of falling. J Gerontol Psych Sci 1991; 45: 239–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hellström K, Lindmark B. Fear of falling in patients with stroke: a reliability study. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 509–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hellström K, Lindmark B, Fugl-Meyer A. The Falls-Efficacy Scale, Swedish version: does it reflect clinically meaningful changes after stroke? Disabil Rehabil 2002; 9: 471–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hellström K, Nilsson L, Fugl-Meyer A. Relationship of confidence in task performance with balance and motor function. Physiother Theor Pract 2001; 17: 55–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hellström K, Lindmark B, Wahlberg B, Fugl-Meyer A. Self-efficacy in relation to impairments and activities of daily living disability in elderly stroke patients: A prospective investigation. J Rehabil Med 2003; 35: 202–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Guide for the Uniform Set for Medical Rehabilitation (adult FIM), version 4.0 (Swedish version 1994). Buffalo: State University of New York, 1993.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cohen ME, Marino RJ. The tools of disability outcomes research functional status measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81(12 Suppl 2): S21–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Seaby L, Torrance G. Reliability of a physiotherapy functional assessment used in a rehabilitation setting. Physiother Can 1989; 41: 264–70.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hajek VE, Gagnon S, Ruderman JE. Cognitive and functional assessments of stroke patients: an analysis of their relation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 78: 1331–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tinetti ME, Ginter SF. The nursing home life-space diameter. A measure of extent and frequency of mobility among nursing home residents. J Am Geriatr Soc 1990; 38: 1311–15.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lawton MP. The Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale: a revision. J Gerontol 1975; 30: 85–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Löfgren B, Gustafson Y, Nyberg L. Psychological well-being 3 years after severe stroke. Stroke 1999; 30: 567–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SF, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189–98.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kukull WA, Larson EB, Teri L, Bowen J, McCormick W, Pfanschmidt ML. The Mini-Mental State Examination score and the clinical diagnosis of dementia. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 1061–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Åsenlöf P, Denison E, Lindberg P. Individually tailored treatment targeting motor behaviour, cognition, and disability. Two experimental single case studies of patients with recurrent and persistent musculoskeletal pain in primary health care. Phys Ther 2005; 85: 1061–77.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Csikzsentmihalyi M. Flow — the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row, 1990.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Roth EJ, Heinemann AW, Lovell LL, Harvey RL, McGuire JR, Diaz R. Impairment and disability: their relation during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 329–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wood-Dauphine S, Berg K, Bravo G, Williams JI. The Balance scale: responsiveness to clinically meaningful changes. Can J Rehabil 1997; 10: 35–50.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Altman DG. Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London: Chapman and Hall, 1995: 179–228.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rutherford A. Introducing ANOVA and ANCOVA: a GLM approach. London: Sage, 2001: 123–44.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Winkens B, van Breukelen GJ, Schouten HJ, Berger MP. Randomized clinical trials with a pre- and a post-treatment measurement: repeated measures versus ANCOVA models. Contemp Clin Trials 2007; 28: 713–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Freund RJ, Wilson WJ, Sa P. Regression analysis: statistical modelling of a response variable. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2006: 35–72.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Newell DJ. Intention-to-treat analysis: implications for quantitative and qualitative research. Int J Epidemiol 1992; 21: 837–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hewitt CE, Torgerson DJ, Miles JN. Is there another way to take account of noncompliance in randomized controlled trials? Can Med Assoc J 2006; 175: 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Åsenlöf P, Denison E, Lindberg P. Behavioural goal assessment in patients with persistent musculoskeletal pain. Physiother Theor Pract 2004; 20: 243–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Schoot T, Proot I, Meulen R, de Witte L. Recognition of client values as a basis for tailored care: the view of Dutch expert patients and family caregivers. Scand J Caring Sci 2005; 19: 169–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kielhofner G. Model of Human Occupation. Philadelphia: Davis, 1996.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Leemrijse CJ, de Boer ME, van den Ende CH, Ribbe MW, Dekker J. Factors associated with physiotherapy provision in a population of elderly nursing home residents; a cross-sectional study. BMC Geriatrics 2007; 7:7doi:10.1186/1471-2318-7-7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Internal Publishing Switzerland 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kerstin Frändin
    • 1
  • Lena Borell
    • 1
  • Helena Grönstedt
    • 1
  • Astrid Bergland
    • 2
  • Jorunn L. Helbostad
    • 3
  • Lis Puggaard
    • 4
  • Mette Andresen
    • 5
  • Randi Granbo
    • 6
  • Karin Hellström
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and SocietyKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Faculty of Health ScienceOslo University CollegeOsloNorway
  3. 3.Faculty of MedicineNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  4. 4.University of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
  5. 5.University College SjaellandNaestvedDenmark
  6. 6.Faculty of Health Education and Social WorkSør-Trøndelag University CollegeTrondheimNorway
  7. 7.Department of NeuroscienceUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations