Background: The aim of the present systematic meta-analytical review was to quantify the effects of different mind–body interventions (MBI) involving meditative movements on relevant psychological health outcomes (i.e., quality of life (QoL), depressive symptoms, fear of falling (FoF) and sleep quality) in older adults without mental disorders. Methods: A structured literature search was conducted in five databases (Ovid, PsycINFO, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science). Inclusion criteria were: (i) the study was a (cluster) randomized controlled trial, (ii) the subjects were aged ≥59 years without mental illnesses, (iii) an intervention arm performing MBI compared to a non-exercise control group (e.g., wait-list or usual care), (iv) psychological health outcomes related to QoL, depressive symptoms, FoF or sleep quality were assessed and (v) a PEDro score of ≥5. The interventions of the included studies were sub-grouped into Tai Chi/Qigong (TCQ) and Yoga/Pilates (YP). Statistical analyses were conducted using a random-effects inverse-variance model. Results: Thirty-seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (comprising 3224 participants) were included. Small to moderate-but-significant overall effect sizes favoring experimental groups (Hedges’ g: 0.25 to 0.71) compared to non-exercise control groups were observed in all outcomes (all p values ≤ 0.007), apart from one subdomain of quality of life (i.e., social functioning, p = 0.15). Interestingly, a significant larger effect on QoL and depressive symptoms with increasing training frequency was found for TCQ (p = 0.03; p = 0.004). Conclusions: MBI involving meditative movements may serve as a promising opportunity to improve psychological health domains such as QoL, depressive symptoms, FoF and sleep quality in older adults. Hence, these forms of exercise may represent potential preventive measures regarding the increase of late-life mental disorders, which need to be further confirmed by future research.

Background: Tackling physical inactivity represents a key global public health challenge. Strategies to increase physical activity (PA) are therefore warranted. Despite the rising availability of digital interventions (DIs), which offer tremendous potential for PA promotion, there has been inadequate attention to the special needs of older adults. Objective: The aim was to investigate community-dwelling older adults’ needs, requirements, and preferences toward DIs to promote PA. Methods: The target population of this cross-sectional study was community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years old) within German-speaking Switzerland. Potential respondents were informed about the study and sent a link to a self-developed and self-administered online survey by our cooperating institutions. Results: Overall, 922 respondents who completed the online survey were included in the final analysis. The mean age of the sample was 72 years (SD 6.4, range 60–98). The preferred delivery mode of DIs to promote PA was a website (428/922, 46.4%) and 80.3% (740/922) preferred video-based structures. Most respondents expressed the need for personal access, personal goals, personal messages, and a personal contact in case of problems or questions (585/817, 71.6%; 546/811, 67.3%; 536/822, 65.2%; 536/822, 65.2%). Memory training, psychological wellbeing, and nutrition were mainly rated as relevant additional content of DIs to promote PA (690/849, 81.2%; 661/845, 78.2%, 619/849, 72.9%). Conclusion: Community-dwelling older adults may be willing to use DIs to promote PA in the long term, but this study identified particular needs and requirements in terms of design, technological realization, delivery mode, support, and individualization/personalization among the sample. Our results can inform future developments of DIs to promote PA specifically tailored to older adults. However, caution is warranted in interpreting the findings due to the sample's high PA and education levels.

Study design: Single-centre, two-parallel group, methodological randomised controlled trial to assess blinding feasibility.Background: Trials of manual therapy interventions of the back face methodological challenges regarding blinding feasibility and success. We assessed the feasibility of blinding an active manual soft tissue mobilisation and control intervention of the back. We also assessed whether blinding is feasible among outcome assessors and explored factors influencing perceptions about intervention assignment.Methods: On 7–8 November 2022, 24 participants were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to active or control manual interventions of the back. The active group (n = 11) received soft tissue mobilisation of the lumbar spine. The control group (n = 13) received light touch over the thoracic region with deep breathing exercises. The primary outcome was blinding of participants immediately after a one-time intervention session, as measured by the Bang blinding index (Bang BI). Bang BI ranges from –1 (complete opposite perceptions of intervention received) to 1 (complete correct perceptions), with 0 indicating ‘random guessing’—balanced ‘active’ and ‘control’ perceptions within an intervention arm. Secondary outcomes included blinding of outcome assessors and factors influencing perceptions about intervention assignment among both participants and outcome assessors, explored via thematic analysis.Results: 24 participants were analysed following an intention-to-treat approach. 55% of participants in the active manual soft tissue mobilisation group correctly perceived their group assignment beyond chance immediately after intervention (Bang BI: 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25 to 0.84]), and 8% did so in the control group (0.08 [95% CI, −0.37 to 0.53]). Bang BIs in outcome assessors were 0.09 (−0.12 to 0.30) and −0.10 (−0.29 to 0.08) for active and control participants, respectively. Participants and outcome assessors reported varying factors related to their perceptions about intervention assignment.Conclusions: Blinding of participants allocated to an active soft tissue mobilisation of the back was not feasible in this methodological trial, whereas blinding of participants allocated to the control intervention and outcome assessors was adequate. Findings are limited due to imprecision and suboptimal generalisability to clinical settings. Careful thinking and consideration of blinding in manual therapy trials is warranted and needed.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05822947 (retrospectively registered)

This study investigated whether enteral nutrition by early tube feeding led to changes in clinical parameters compared to tube feeding after 24 h. Starting on 1 January 2021, and following the latest update of the ESPEN guidelines on enteral nutrition, patients with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) received tube feeding 4 h after tube insertion. An observational study was conducted to analyze whether the new scheme affected patient complaints, complications, or hospitalization duration compared to the previous procedure of tube feeding starting after 24 h. Clinical patient records from one year before and one year after the introduction of the new scheme were examined. A total of 98 patients were included, and of those 47 received tube feeding 24 h after tube insertion, and 51 received tube feeding 4 h after tube insertion. The new scheme did not influence the frequency or severity of patient complaints or complications related to tube feeding (all p-values > 0.05). However, the study showed that the length of stay in hospital was significantly shorter when following the new scheme (p = 0.030). In this observational cohort study an earlier start of tube feeding did not produce any negative consequences but did reduce the duration of hospitalization. Therefore, an early start, as suggested in the recent ESPEN guidelines, is supported and recommended.

Introduction Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survivors suffer from impaired physical and psychological functioning and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) that persist after active treatment ends. Sustaining rehabilitation benefits, promoting a healthy lifestyle and facilitating self-management at home require a multifaceted aftercare programme. We aim to investigate the effect of a 12-week digital lifestyle intervention on HRQoL and lifestyle-related outcomes in NSCLC survivors after completion of inpatient rehabilitation. Methods and analysis QUAlity of life in LUng CAncer Survivors (QUALUCA) is a multicentre randomised controlled trial that follows a hybrid type 1 design. We randomly allocate participants in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention group (digital lifestyle intervention) or the control group (standard care) using block randomisation stratified by tumour stage and study site. Four accredited Swiss inpatient rehabilitation centres recruit participants. Key inclusion criteria are a diagnosis of NSCLC, an estimated life expectancy of ≥6 months and access to a smartphone or tablet. The 12-week intervention comprises physical activity, nutrition and breathing/relaxation, delivered through a mobile application (app). The primary outcome is the change in HRQoL from baseline (1 week after rehabilitation) to follow-up (3 months after baseline), assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Secondary outcomes include body mass index, self-reported physical activity, exercise capacity, risk of low protein intake, appetite, psychological distress, cancer-related fatigue, enablement and self-rated health. Explanatory outcomes in the intervention group include app usability, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the intervention, experiences and satisfaction with the intervention, and app usage data. We aim to enrol 88 participants. For the main statistical analysis, we will use analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline measures, stratification variables, age and sex. Ethics and dissemination The Ethics Committees of the Canton of Zurich (lead), the Canton of Bern and Northwest and Central Switzerland approved the study (2023-00245). We will disseminate study results to researchers, health professionals, study participants and relevant organisations, and through publications in international peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number NCT05819346.

Mobile health (mHealth) interventions can transform health care delivery and improve public health. At the same time, the evidence on lifestyle interventions continues to grow. They show promising results in preventing and treating noncommunicable diseases and enhancing health-related quality of life. These factors highlight the potential of multidomain mHealth interventions for lifestyle management. This viewpoint paper focuses on drawing valuable lessons from past experiences and providing guidance to developers of mHealth interventions for lifestyle management. We underscore the critical role of sharing practical insights to advance innovation in the field of mHealth interventions. We used an iterative consensus process to derive lessons learned, identify challenges, and reflect on possible actions. Our insights are based on our experience in developing 2 smartphone-based lifestyle interventions. Challenges and corresponding options in the following areas are presented: target population (preferences, personalization, and delivery), user involvement and testing, human support, and multidomain interventions (interdisciplinarity, flexibility, and core team). The development of multidomain mHealth interventions for lifestyle management requires a participatory and iterative approach involving relevant stakeholders (including end users) so that the right people get the right content at the right time. Additionally, it is crucial to consider established frameworks, guidelines, and regulations; allocate appropriate resources; and form a core team committed to the project’s aims and open to working in an interdisciplinary team.