Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Efficacy of exercise to improve motor symptoms in Parkinson's Disease (PD) has been established in multiple clinical trials. The Pedaling for Parkinson's ™ (PFP) program is an existing community-based cycling intervention for individuals with PD. Although PFP program design was informed by in-laboratory efficacy studies, the implementation and effectiveness of the program in the community have not been studied. This feasibility study explores implementation and effectiveness of PFP utilizing the RE-AIM implementation evaluation framework.
Methods: This was a pragmatic open-label multi-site study. First, community-based gyms were recruited to implement the PFP protocol with enhanced multi-modal training and support. Second individuals with Hoehn and Yahr stage I-III idiopathic PD were recruited to participate. Reach, effectiveness (both clinical scores and participant enjoyment), adoption, implementation (gym and participant fidelity, cost), and maintenance (sustainability) were assessed. Tracking of adverse events was used to monitor safety of the intervention.
Results: Reach was moderate: 59% of participants who expressed interest opted to participate. No effectiveness outcomes demonstrated a significant change from pre to post; however, the program was highly enjoyable (96% of participants who started classes enjoyed the program and 87% wished to continue). Adoption was poor with only four out of 34 gyms participating. The program had poor gym and moderate participant fidelity. The program was maintained for at least 4 months across all sites. The program was implemented safely.
Conclusion: Barriers to implementation of nonpharmacologic interventions such as exercise protocols limit reach and availability of these interventions to patients. Pilot studies are needed to inform and direct further implementation efforts. Our pilot study suggests the PFP cycling intervention should be modified prior to attempts at widespread implementation. Modifications made by gyms in this study suggest adaptations to the protocol that may increase fidelity and effectiveness.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8035480 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2053 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!