Open AccessEFFECTS OF TELEHEALTH PROGRAM ON FUNCTIONAL MOBILITY AMONG ELDERLY WITH DEMENTIA: PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Author(s) -
Carolina Tsen,
Juliana Hotta Ansai,
Grace Angélica de Oliveira Gomes,
Décio Bueno Neto,
Renata Gerassi,
Mariana Alves Porto,
Jéssica Bianca Aily,
Larissa Pires de Andrade
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
dementia and neuropsychologia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Conference proceedings
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.54
H-Index - 21
ISSN - 1980-5764
DOI - 10.5327/1980-5764.rpda084
Subject(s) - telehealth , dementia , intervention (counseling) , physical therapy , medicine , randomized controlled trial , test (biology) , timed up and go test , elderly people , gerontology , physical medicine and rehabilitation , telemedicine , nursing , health care , balance (ability) , paleontology , disease , economics , biology , economic growth
Background: Telehealth is and alternative to improve functional mobility of elderly with dementia on a pandemic scenario, but still little explored on Brazil. Objective: To analyze the effects of a telehealth program on functional mobility among elderly with dementia. Methods: Ten elderly with dementia were evaluated about functional capacity through physical test Timed Up and Go. After, they were randomized and divided into two groups: telehealth group (TG) and control group (CG). The TG performed systematic physical and cognitive exercises with professional monitoring, while the CG received non-systematized guidance, both for 12 weeks. Participants were evaluated pre, immediately after three-month intervention and with a 12- week follow-up. Results: Of the 10 participants, 5 were allocated to each group. In the pre-intervention evaluation, the CG had a mean of 15.64 +/- 5.04 seconds in the TUG test and the TG had a mean of 19.78 +/- 6.51, that is, above 12.45 seconds means risk of falling. In the post-intervention, the CG had a mean of 16.83 +/- 6.77 and the TG a mean of 25.22 +/- 19.50. After 3 months of follow-up, the CG and the TG showed a mean of 16.08 +/- 2.04 and 17.98 +/- 6.73, respectively. Conclusion: After the intervention period, due to the small number of the sample, it was not possible to verify improvement in either group.