AzTrials
AzTrials

HealthyNCT06441396

Comparison of Telerehabilitation and Video Basics and Exercise in Older Adult Individuals

A study testing Telerehabilitation and Video-based rehabilitation (VTR) in people with Healthy, run by Hacettepe University.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Researchers could not find a study in the literature examining the effectiveness of different technological methods in exercise practices in older adults. Based on this, the aim of this study is to compare the effect of exercise intervention using telerehabilitation and video-based rehabilitation method on physical… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 65 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Healthy
What is being tested?
Telerehabilitation and Video-based rehabilitation (VTR)
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
30 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
31 Jan 2002to 31 Dec 2023
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 65 to 75 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Not having cognitive problems
  • Being over 65 years old
  • Volunteering to participate in the study

Who cannot join

  • Amputees
  • Those who cannot communicate adequately
  • Having a neurological or orthopedic problem that will affect functionality
  • Those who cannot walk independently
  • Those who underwent surgery
  • Those with endoprosthesis

About this study

Official title: Comparison of the Effects of Telerehabilitation and Video Fundamentals of Exercise on Physical Performance and Body Composition in Older Adult Individuals

Researchers could not find a study in the literature examining the effectiveness of different technological methods in exercise practices in older adults. Based on this, the aim of this study is to compare the effect of exercise intervention using telerehabilitation and video-based rehabilitation method on physical performance, muscle mass, fat percentage and body mass index.

Read the detailed description

Telerehabilitation is defined as the use of information and telecommunication technologies to provide healthcare services over a long distance between a patient and a healthcare professional. It involves a multi-component approach such as remote monitoring, e-learning and tele-coaching. The American Telemedicine Association defines telerehabilitation as "the delivery of rehabilitation services through information and communication technologies." It also states that telerehabilitation encompasses a range of rehabilitation and habilitation services, including assessment, monitoring, prevention, intervention, supervision, education, counseling and counseling.

In cases where access to healthcare services is limited, it is recommended to use telerehabilitation to provide effective rehabilitation services to patients. Telerehabilitation is an emerging field that is growing rapidly and becoming an important part of telemedicine and e-health. It is hypothesized that it may offer new possibilities to deliver intervention strategies across the continuum of rehabilitation and that the distance barrier can be minimized to increase access. Minimizing the distance barrier can be achieved through various modes of telecommunications, including voice, video and virtual reality.

Telerehabilitation refers to services provided by occupational therapists, speech therapists, and physical therapists. It provides continuity of service throughout the entire rehabilitation cycle, including assessment, intervention, consultation and education, and has emerged as an effective support for providing home rehabilitation care to recently discharged patients. In the practice of telerehabilitation, it is assumed that patients have various advantages in many respects, as they have the opportunity to perform rehabilitation in their own social environment, can avoid transportation problems, can personally arrange their exercise hours, and are encouraged to self-manage their disease.

The use of telerehabilitation can promote standardization, improve patient compliance with exercise programs, and reduce costs. Additionally, this type of technology can also facilitate participation in rehabilitation when patients cannot access traditional physical therapy services due to geographic challenges or inability to travel.

A Cochrane review found that the technologies used in telerehabilitation interventions were well accepted by patients, but further studies were needed to increase the evidence base for clinical benefits.

Participation in exercise is low in elderly individuals, and the Covid 19 pandemic has further reduced the low participation of the elderly in exercise. For this reason, telerehabilitation for the elderly is becoming more and more important day by day.

Researchers could not find a study in the literature examining the effectiveness of different technological methods in exercise practices in older adults. Based on this, the aim of this study is to compare the effect of exercise intervention using telerehabilitation and video-based rehabilitation method on physical performance, muscle mass, fat percentage and body mass index.

Location of the research: Hacettepe University Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Geriatric Rehabilitation Unit and Lokman Hekim University

Population of the study, sample, research group: The minimum number of participates required to be included in the study was determined by power analysis. It is planned to include individuals applying to Hacettepe University Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Geriatric Rehabilitation Unit and Lokman Hekim University to participate in the research. Individuals who give their written consent and meet the inclusion criteria will be included in the study.

Study design:

Signed consent was obtained from the participants who agreed to participate in the research, and the research was conducted by the researchers within the framework of the ethical rules determined according to the Declaration of Helsinki.

The researchers followed the instructions in the CONSORT checklist used in randomized controlled trials while writing the article.

Individuals over 65 years old who participated in the study were divided into 2 groups (TR and VTR) by computer-generated randomization (allocation ratio of 1:1). The researchers sent only videotaped exercises to the VTR group and were asked to follow the exercises in the videos.

In order to better understand the exercises, the researchers sent these recorded videos to the TR group, and the researchers also had the participants do the exercises online with the help of TR using the WhatsApp program. Before and after the intervention, the participants were evaluated by the researchers in terms of physical performance, muscle mass, fat ratio and BMI. These evaluation results were compared within and between groups. The exercises performed by both participant groups were performed for 25-45 minutes, 3 days a week for 6 weeks.

Both participates groups were given the same exercises.

Conditions
Healthy
Being tested
Telerehabilitation, Video-based rehabilitation (VTR)
Keywords
Tele-rehabilitation, Exercise, Elderly
Medical subject headings
Motor Activity

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • TelerehabilitationOther

    In the study, the VTR guru was given video footage of 15 exercises previously recorded on camera. The individuals in this group were made to do the exercises together online via the WhatsApp program. Exercises in both groups were planned for 6 weeks, 3 days a week, 25-45 minutes. The main program consists of 15 calisthenic exercises involving the lower extremity, upper extremity and trunk large muscle groups. Exercises in both groups were planned for 6 weeks, 3 days a week, 25-45 minutes. The number of repetitions of each exercise started with 10 and was increased by 5 repetitions every two weeks until it reached 20 repetitions.

  • Video-based rehabilitation (VTR)Other

    In the study, the VTR guru was given video footage of 15 exercises previously recorded on camera. Participants were asked to exercise by watching these videos. In addition, these individuals were interviewed once a week to check the progress of the exercise program. Video images were sent to the intervention group for informational purposes, and the individuals in this group were made to do the exercises together online via the WhatsApp program.

Study groups in NCT06441396
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
TelerehabilitationActive comparatorIt is a group that performs the given exercise program mutually with the physiotherapist via video connection.
Receives: Other: Telerehabilitation
Video-based rehabilitationActive comparatorThis is the group that does the given exercises by watching the video.
Receives: Other: Video-based rehabilitation (VTR)

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Physical performance tests- 30 seconds chair stand test:

    It is performed to evaluate lower extremity endurance. The individual is asked to fully stand up from a chair without armrests and sit back down for 30 seconds. The exact number of standing up and sitting down during thirty seconds is recorded. An increase in the number of starts means better endurance

    Measured: six weeks

  2. Physical performance tests- 30 seconds chair stand test-Time up & go test (TUG):

    Time up \& go test (TUG): It is used to evaluate balance and functional mobility. The person is seated on a chair without armrests, then the person is asked to get up from the chair, walk 3 m, return to the chair and sit down. The time it takes to complete the test is recorded. Decreasing test completion time means better performance

    Measured: six weeks

  3. Physical performance tests- Single leg stance:

    Single leg stance: Without shoes, they stand on one leg with their hands on their hips, one knee bent, and time is kept. It is performed 3 times for each extremity, the best score is recorded (16).

    Measured: six weeks

  4. Physical performance tests- Six-minute walk test:

    It is used to determine the functional exercise capacities of participants. Participants are asked to walk quickly for 6 minutes. The distance walked during this time is measured in meters. Long distance indicates better physical performance

    Measured: six weeks

Secondary outcomes (5)
  1. Assessing the participants' height

    Researchers measure the participants' height using a meter. This recorded value in meters (m) will then be entered into the Inboby 120 device, which gives the participant's weight in kilograms (kg) to the researchers with the help of electrodes.

    Measured: six weeks

  2. Evaluation of body mass index

    Inbody 120 device shows the participant's body mass index Muscle mass (kg), fat percentage (%) and Body Mass Index (BMI) (kg/m²) values of the participants were measured with the InBody 120 (Biospace, California, USA) bioimpedance analyzer. The device analyzes via tetra polar bio-electrical impedance (BIA). The measurement frequency is between 20-100 kHz. Electric currents pass more easily through body tissues where there is a lot of water (such as blood, urine and muscles) than through other tissues (such as bone, fat or air). With this method, the speed and strength of electrical currents passing through the body are measured and these results are used to determine information such as height, weight, gender and body composition of the person.

    Measured: six weeks

  3. Evaluation of height

    Inbody 120 device shows the participant's general body weight. Muscle mass (kg), fat percentage (%) and Body Mass Index (BMI) (kg/m²) values of the participants were measured with the InBody 120 (Biospace, California, USA) bioimpedance analyzer. The device analyzes via tetra polar bio-electrical impedance (BIA). The measurement frequency is between 20-100 kHz. Electric currents pass more easily through body tissues where there is a lot of water (such as blood, urine and muscles) than through other tissues (such as bone, fat or air). With this method, the speed and strength of electrical currents passing through the body are measured and these results are used to determine information such as height, weight, gender and body composition of the person.

    Measured: six weeks

  4. Evaluation of muscle mass

    Inbody 120 device shows the participant's muscle mass. Muscle mass (kg), fat percentage (%) and Body Mass Index (BMI) (kg/m²) values of the participants were measured with the InBody 120 (Biospace, California, USA) bioimpedance analyzer. The device analyzes via tetra polar bio-electrical impedance (BIA). The measurement frequency is between 20-100 kHz. Electric currents pass more easily through body tissues where there is a lot of water (such as blood, urine and muscles) than through other tissues (such as bone, fat or air). With this method, the speed and strength of electrical currents passing through the body are measured and these results are used to determine information such as height, weight, gender and body composition of the person.

    Measured: six weeks

  5. Evaluation of fat ratio

    Inbody 120 device shows the participant's ratio. Muscle mass (kg), fat percentage (%) and Body Mass Index (BMI) (kg/m²) values of the participants were measured with the InBody 120 (Biospace, California, USA) bioimpedance analyzer. The device analyzes via tetra polar bio-electrical impedance (BIA). The measurement frequency is between 20-100 kHz. Electric currents pass more easily through body tissues where there is a lot of water (such as blood, urine and muscles) than through other tissues (such as bone, fat or air). With this method, the speed and strength of electrical currents passing through the body are measured and these results are used to determine information such as height, weight, gender and body composition of the person.

    Measured: six weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted4 Jun 2024
  2. Study start31 Jan 2002
  3. Primary completion1 Dec 2023
  4. Study completion31 Dec 2023

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
Telerehabilitation is a group Video-based rehabilitation is the other group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
30 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06441396
Sponsor's protocol ID
Hacettepe University-Ftr-Oe
Status last verified
May 2024
First submitted
18 May 2024
Last updated
4 Jun 2024
Results posted
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Elmas O, Cemali M, Livanelioglu A. Comparison of the effects of video conference and video-based home exercise on physical performance and body composition in older adult individuals. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Nov 1;103(44):e40329. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000040329.

    PubMed 39495999

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Telerehabilitation and Video-based rehabilitation (VTR) in people with Healthy, run by Hacettepe University.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Jun 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Physical performance tests- 30 seconds chair stand test: (time frame: six weeks). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06441396, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Jun 2024; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in