↓ Skip to main content

No one size fits all—the development of a theory-driven intervention to increase in-hospital mobility: the “WALK-FOR” study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
No one size fits all—the development of a theory-driven intervention to increase in-hospital mobility: the “WALK-FOR” study
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0778-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Zisberg, Maayan Agmon, Nurit Gur-Yaish, Debbie Rand, Yehudit Hayat, Efrat Gil, the WALK-FOR team

Abstract

There is growing evidence that mobility interventions can increase in-hospital mobility and prevent hospitalization-associated functional decline among older adults. However, implementing such interventions is challenging, mainly due to site-specific constraints and limited resources. The Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS 2.0) model has the potential to guide a sustainable, site-tailored mobility intervention. Thus, the aim of the current study is to demonstrate an adaptation process guided by the SEIPS 2.0 model to articulate site-specific, culturally based interventions to improve in-hospital mobility among older adults. Six consecutive phases addressed each of the model's elements in the research setting. Phase-1 aimed to determine a measurable outcome: steps/d, measured with accelerometers, associated with functional decline. Phase-2 included interviews with key persons in leadership positions in the hospital to explore organizational factors affecting in-hospital mobility. Phases-3 and 4 aimed to identify attitudes, knowledge, barriers, and current behaviors of medical staff (n = 116) and patients (n = 203) related to patient mobility. Phase-5 included four focus-groups with unit staff aimed at developing an action plan while adapting existing intervention strategies to site needs. Phase-6 relied on a steering committee that developed intervention-adaptation and implementation plans. Nine hundred steps/d was defined as the intervention outcome. 40% of patients walked fewer than 900 steps/d regardless of capability. Assessing or promoting mobility did not exist as a separate task and thus was routinely overlooked. Several barriers to patients' mobility were identified, specifically limited knowledge of practical aspects of mobility. Consequently, staff adopted practical steps to address them. Nurses were designated to assess mobility, and nursing assistants to support mobility. Mobility was defined as a quality indicator to be documented in electronic medical records and closely supervised by hospital and unit management. Preliminary analyses of the "Walk FOR" protocol demonstrates its' ability to reduce barriers, to re-shape staff attitudes and knowledge, and to increase in-hospital mobility of older adults. The SEIPS-2.0 model can serve as a useful guide for implementing a site-tailored comprehensive mobility intervention. This process, which relies on local resources, may promise sustainable practice change that may support early effective rehabilitation and recovery.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 149 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 13%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 52 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 7%
Engineering 5 3%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 51 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,249,390
of 25,312,451 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#533
of 3,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,921
of 334,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#17
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,312,451 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.