Author(s): CALVO SÁNCHEZ, M., MEDRANO-GALECH, C., DOMINGO-DEL-VAL, D., NAVARRETE-VILLANUEVA, D., LOZANO-BERGES, G., VICENTE-RODRÍGUEZ, G., GÓMEZ-CABELLO, A., MATUTE-LLORENTE, A., Institution: UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA, Country: SPAIN, Abstract-ID: 1932

INTRODUCTION:
Frailty is a clinical syndrome associated with an increased risk of falls, hospitalization, and dependency, which is especially concerning in rural areas where access to healthcare resources is limited. Multicomponent training is an effective non-pharmacological tool for reducing frailty. However, its effectiveness may depend on how the program is delivered. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a multicomponent training program implemented through an initial face-to-face phase followed by a video-assisted phase on frailty levels among rural-dwelling older adults.
METHODS:
A total of 100 adults aged ≥65 years (74.2±5.8 years) living in rural areas of Aragón participated in this study. Participants were allocated to either an intervention group (IG; n = 62; age = 73.8±5.9 years; 79.7% women) or a control group (CG; n = 38; age = 74.5±5.8 years; 67.6% women). Frailty was assessed using the Frailty Trait Scale short form (FTS-5). Participants in the CG maintained their usual lifestyle, attending one monthly health education session. The IG completed a 12-week multicomponent training program using a face-to-face methodology. Following an 8-week break (July and August), they completed an additional 12 weeks of video-assisted, multicomponent training. Three evaluations were carried out over one year: baseline (T1), post-face-to-face intervention (T2) and post-video-assisted intervention (T3). Changes in frailty were analysed using a two-way repeated-measures ANOVA to examine the effects of group and time.
RESULTS:
At baseline, all participants started in a state of pre-frailty (FTS5=15-25 points) with no significant differences between groups (p=0.596). When analysing the progression in the FTS5 from T1 to T2, a significant time x group interaction was found (IG vs. CG; 16.4 to 15.3 vs.15.9 to 17.3, p=0.002). From T2 to T3, the IG maintained its progress with no significant further changes (15.3 to 14.7; p=1.000), whereas the CG showed continued decline (17.3 at T2 vs 18.1 at T3). By the end of the intervention, there was a significant main group effect (T3; IG vs. CG; 14.7 vs. 18.1, p<0.001).
CONCLUSION:
While the control group showed progressive decline, the face-to-face intervention successfully lowered frailty levels. The video-assisted phase successfully sustained the progress from face-to-face intervention, achieving both clinical and statistical significance by the end of the trial. These results reinforce the viability of hybrid exercise models for sustainable long-term frailty management.