FrailtyNCT05920577
Effects of Exergames and Resistance Training
A study testing exergames and resistance training and Resistance training in people with Frailty and Sacropenia, run by Hong Kong Metropolitan University at 1 site in Hong Kong.
Trial summary
Frailty is a common geriatric condition with significantly increased vulnerability to stress and susceptibility of negative health-related outcomes. Sacropenia and impaired cognitive function are two major contributors to frailty. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 60 to 90 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Frailty, Sacropenia, Cognition
- What is being tested?
- exergames and resistance training and Resistance training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 siteHong Kong
- Study dates
- 1 Apr 2024to 30 May 2025
- 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 60 to 90 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- living in a nursing home
- fulfilled 1, 2 or 3 Fried Criteria of frailty
- score ≥7 of 10 on the Chinese version of the Abbreviated Mental Test
- able to follow the instructions of assessment and intervention
Who cannot join
- involved in any drug or other clinical trials
- having any additional medical conditions (such as epilepsy)
- unable to walk independently without the use of walking aids
- having any other conditions that will hinder the assessment and intervention (e.g.,visual/audio impairment could not be corrected by glasses/hearing aids etc).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effects of the Combined Use of Exergaming and Resistance Training in Improving the Frailty of Nursing Home Residents: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial
Frailty is a common geriatric condition with significantly increased vulnerability to stress and susceptibility of negative health-related outcomes. Sacropenia and impaired cognitive function are two major contributors to frailty. This study aims to evaluate the effects of the combined use of exergaming and resistance training in improving the frailty of nursing home residents.
Read the detailed description
Frailty is a common geriatric condition with significantly increased vulnerability to stress and susceptibility of negative health-related outcomes. The prevalence rates of frailty varies across countries, and the pooled estimates of prevalence rates of 52.3% and 40.2% of frailty and prefrailty were reported among nursing home residents respectively. Previous studies also revealed that frailty is predictive for various adverse health outcomes.
Sacropenia is a major etiologic risk factor to frailty. It refers to an age-related generalised muscle disorder featuring with loss of muscle mass and function5. Talar et al systematically reviewed and meta-analysed 25 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using resistance training among 2,267 older people (age >65 years) with pre-sarcopenia, sarcopenia, pre-frailty or frailty. It was revealed that, compared to control, resistance training with at least 8 weeks intervention period had small to large effects in improving handgrip strength, lower-limb strength, agility, gait speed, postural stability, functional performance, fat mass and muscle [Effect size (ES) = 0.29 - 0.93, p <0.001 to = 0.007].
Cognitive impairment is another major risk factor for declined frailty status among prefrail older people. Non-frail older people are known to have better performance on cognitive status, including processing speed, executive function, attention and working memory, immediate memory and delayed memory (g = 0.320 to 0.64), than frail older people. Ample research evidence suggested that cognition predicts the incidence of frailty.
Exergaming is a fast growing research trend in gerontechnology and several commercial exergaming consoles, such as the Xbox system (including Xbox One and Xbox 360) and Nintendo Will (Wii Sports and Wii Fit), are available. Ogawa et al systematically reviewed 7 clinical trials (5 RCTs and 2 uncontrolled studies) and revealed that exergaming could improve cognitive functions, including executive function, process speed and reaction time, of older people. Moreover, a recent RCT revealed that, compared with the combined use of exercise (resistance, aerobic and balance training), a 12 week Kinect-based exergaming could better improve the global cognition [F(1, 44) = 5.277, p = 0.026] as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment of community-frail older people. The Kinect-based group (n = 25) also demonstrated significant improvement in verbal (p < 0.05) and working (p < 0.05) memory post-intervention but the combined exercise group (n = 21) did not.
Given that sacropenia and impaired cognitive function are 2 major contributors to frailty; and exergaming and resistance training are effective treatments in improving the cognitive function and sacropenia of older people respectively, this study aims to evaluate the effects of the combined use of exergaming and resistance training in improving the frailty of nursing home residents.
- Conditions
- Frailty, Sacropenia, Cognition, Mood, Mobility
- Being tested
- exergames and resistance training, Resistance training
- Keywords
- Nursing home residents, Frailty, Sacropenia
- Medical subject headings
- Frailty
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
exergames and resistance trainingOther
In each session, the participants will receive 40 minutes of combined use of exergaming and resistance training. The participants will practice the exergames using the gaming system Nintendo Switch (Nintendo Co., Ltd, Kyoto, Japan). The gaming software "Nintendo Switch Sports" will be adopted in which arrays of exergames are available to strengthen both the upper and lower extremity muscle and improve the balance ability of participants. The exergaming programme will consist of both upper (badminton game and tennis game) and lower (soccer game) extremity games. For week 1 and 2, the participants will first practice 1-minute warm up exercise (stretching exercises) and then the 3 exergames. For week 3 to 12, the participants will receive the same warm up exercise and exergames as if week 1 and 2 but there will be an addition of light cuff weight for resistance training.
Resistance trainingOther
The resistance training programme consists of 2 parts, the upper limb and lower limb resistance exercises. For the upper limb resistance exercises, the participants will first practice 5-minute warm up of upper limb using ergometer and then undergo 2 resistance exercises, including handgrip and elbow flexion. For the lower limb exercise, the participants will also first practice 5-minute warm up of lower limb using ergometer and then undergo 3 resistance exercises, including squatting, single-leg standing and knee extension.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Exergames and resistance training group | Experimental | Participants will receive exergaming and resistance training programme over a period of 12 weeks Receives: Other: exergames and resistance training |
| Resistance training group | Active comparator | Participants will receive resistance training programme over a period of 12 weeks Receives: Other: Resistance training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Muscle quantity, higher score means better muscle quantity
Will be assessed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 6 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Will be assessed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 12 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Will be assessed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 16 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Will be assssed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 24 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Will be assssed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Measured: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Muscle strength, higher score means better muscle strength
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline muscle strength at 6 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline muscle strength at 12 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline muscle strength at 16 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline muscle strength at 24 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Measured: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Lower Extremity functions, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 6 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 12 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 16 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 24 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Measured: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Secondary outcomes (20)
Cognitive function, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Will be assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (HK version)
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 6 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Will be assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (HK version)
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 12 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Will be assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (HK version)
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 16 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Will be assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (HK version)
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 24 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Will be assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (HK version)
Measured: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Mobility, longer time means worse functional mobility
Will be assessed using the Timed Up and Go Test
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline mobility at 6 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Will be assessed using the Timed Up and Go Test
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline mobility at 12 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Will be assessed using the Timed Up and Go Test
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline mobility at 16 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Will be assessed using the Timed Up and Go Test
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline mobility at 24 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Will be assessed using the Timed Up and Go Test
Measured: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Frailty, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Will be assessed using the Chinese version of Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-C)
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline frailty at 6 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Will be assessed using the Chinese version of Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-C)
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline frailty at 12 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Will be assessed using the Chinese version of Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-C)
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline frailty at 16 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Will be assessed using the Chinese version of Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-C)
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline frailty at 24 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Will be assessed using the Chinese version of Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS-C)
Measured: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Sarcopenia, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Will be assessed using the Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs and (Calf) Falls(SARC-Calf)
Measured: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 6 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Will be assessed using the Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs and (Calf) Falls (SARC-Calf)
Measured: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 12 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Will be assessed using the Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs and (Calf) Falls(SARC-Calf)
Measured: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 16 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Will be assessed using the Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs and (Calf) Falls (SARC-Calf)
Measured: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 24 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Will be assessed using the Strength, Assistance with walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs and (Calf) Falls (SARC-Calf)
Measured: T5: 3 month follow up (week 16)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Jun 2023
- Study start1 Apr 2024
- Primary completion31 Dec 2024
- Study completion30 May 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for FrailtyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This pilot randomised controlled trial will conduct in a nursing home starting from Aug 2023 in Hong Kong
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hong Kong Metropolitan University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr Liu Tai Wa, Hong Kong Metropolitan University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05920577
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Frailty_2023
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 17 Jun 2023
- Last updated
- 18 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: The datasets of the study will only be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request after the findings being published in peer-reviewed journal.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of the Combined Use of Exergaming and Resistance Training in Improving the Frailty of Nursing Home Residents: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05920577
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Frailty_2023
- Conditions
- Frailty, Sacropenia, Cognition, Mood, Mobility
- Keywords
- Nursing home residents, Frailty, Sacropenia
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hong Kong Metropolitan UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Apr 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 May 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Jun 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Frailty is a common geriatric condition with significantly increased vulnerability to stress and susceptibility of negative health-related outcomes. Sacropenia and impaired cognitive function are two major contributors to frailty. This study aims to evaluate the effects of the combined use of exergaming and resistance training in improving the frailty of nursing home residents.
Detailed description
Frailty is a common geriatric condition with significantly increased vulnerability to stress and susceptibility of negative health-related outcomes. The prevalence rates of frailty varies across countries, and the pooled estimates of prevalence rates of 52.3% and 40.2% of frailty and prefrailty were reported among nursing home residents respectively. Previous studies also revealed that frailty is predictive for various adverse health outcomes.
Sacropenia is a major etiologic risk factor to frailty. It refers to an age-related generalised muscle disorder featuring with loss of muscle mass and function5. Talar et al systematically reviewed and meta-analysed 25 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using resistance training among 2,267 older people (age >65 years) with pre-sarcopenia, sarcopenia, pre-frailty or frailty. It was revealed that, compared to control, resistance training with at least 8 weeks intervention period had small to large effects in improving handgrip strength, lower-limb strength, agility, gait speed, postural stability, functional performance, fat mass and muscle [Effect size (ES) = 0.29 - 0.93, p <0.001 to = 0.007].
Cognitive impairment is another major risk factor for declined frailty status among prefrail older people. Non-frail older people are known to have better performance on cognitive status, including processing speed, executive function, attention and working memory, immediate memory and delayed memory (g = 0.320 to 0.64), than frail older people. Ample research evidence suggested that cognition predicts the incidence of frailty.
Exergaming is a fast growing research trend in gerontechnology and several commercial exergaming consoles, such as the Xbox system (including Xbox One and Xbox 360) and Nintendo Will (Wii Sports and Wii Fit), are available. Ogawa et al systematically reviewed 7 clinical trials (5 RCTs and 2 uncontrolled studies) and revealed that exergaming could improve cognitive functions, including executive function, process speed and reaction time, of older people. Moreover, a recent RCT revealed that, compared with the combined use of exercise (resistance, aerobic and balance training), a 12 week Kinect-based exergaming could better improve the global cognition [F(1, 44) = 5.277, p = 0.026] as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment of community-frail older people. The Kinect-based group (n = 25) also demonstrated significant improvement in verbal (p < 0.05) and working (p < 0.05) memory post-intervention but the combined exercise group (n = 21) did not.
Given that sacropenia and impaired cognitive function are 2 major contributors to frailty; and exergaming and resistance training are effective treatments in improving the cognitive function and sacropenia of older people respectively, this study aims to evaluate the effects of the combined use of exergaming and resistance training in improving the frailty of nursing home residents.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This pilot randomised controlled trial will conduct in a nursing home starting from Aug 2023 in Hong Kong
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Exergames and resistance training group | Experimental | Other: exergames and resistance trainingParticipants will receive exergaming and resistance training programme over a period of 12 weeks |
| Resistance training group | Active comparator | Other: Resistance trainingParticipants will receive resistance training programme over a period of 12 weeks |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 60 to 90 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- living in a nursing home
- fulfilled 1, 2 or 3 Fried Criteria of frailty
- score ≥7 of 10 on the Chinese version of the Abbreviated Mental Test
- able to follow the instructions of assessment and intervention
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- involved in any drug or other clinical trials
- having any additional medical conditions (such as epilepsy)
- unable to walk independently without the use of walking aids
- having any other conditions that will hinder the assessment and intervention (e.g.,visual/audio impairment could not be corrected by glasses/hearing aids etc).
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| exergames and resistance trainingIn each session, the participants will receive 40 minutes of combined use of exergaming and resistance training. The participants will practice the exergames using the gaming system Nintendo Switch (Nintendo Co., Ltd, Kyoto, Japan). The gaming software "Nintendo Switch Sports" will be adopted in which arrays of exergames are available to strengthen both the upper and lower extremity muscle and improve the balance ability of participants. The exergaming programme will consist of both upper (badminton game and tennis game) and lower (soccer game) extremity games. For week 1 and 2, the participants will first practice 1-minute warm up exercise (stretching exercises) and then the 3 exergames. For week 3 to 12, the participants will receive the same warm up exercise and exergames as if week 1 and 2 but there will be an addition of light cuff weight for resistance training. | Other | Exergames and resistance training group |
| Resistance trainingThe resistance training programme consists of 2 parts, the upper limb and lower limb resistance exercises. For the upper limb resistance exercises, the participants will first practice 5-minute warm up of upper limb using ergometer and then undergo 2 resistance exercises, including handgrip and elbow flexion. For the lower limb exercise, the participants will also first practice 5-minute warm up of lower limb using ergometer and then undergo 3 resistance exercises, including squatting, single-leg standing and knee extension. | Other | Resistance training group |
Primary outcome
Muscle quantity, higher score means better muscle quantity
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Will be assessed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 6 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Will be assessed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 12 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Will be assessed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 16 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Will be assssed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Change from baseline muscle quantity at 24 weeks, higher score means better muscle quantity
Time frame: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Will be assssed using a bioelectrical impedance measurement
Muscle strength, higher score means better muscle strength
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Change from baseline muscle strength at 6 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Change from baseline muscle strength at 12 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Change from baseline muscle strength at 16 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Change from baseline muscle strength at 24 weeks, higher score means better muscle strength
Time frame: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Will be assessed using a handheld dynamometer
Lower Extremity functions, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 6 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 12 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 16 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
Change from baseline lower extremity functions at 24 weeks, score ranged from 0-12, higher scores mean better lower extremity functions
Time frame: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Will be assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery
20 secondary outcomes
Cognitive function, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 6 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 12 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 16 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline cognitive function at 24 weeks, higher score means better cognitive function, score ranged from 0 - 30, higher scores mean better cognition
Time frame: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Mobility, longer time means worse functional mobility
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline mobility at 6 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline mobility at 12 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline mobility at 16 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline mobility at 24 weeks, longer time means worse functional mobility
Time frame: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Frailty, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline frailty at 6 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline frailty at 12 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline frailty at 16 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline frailty at 24 weeks, score range 0 to 9, higher score means higher level of frailty
Time frame: T5: 3 months follow up (week 24)
Sarcopenia, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 6 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Time frame: T2: mid-intervention (week 6)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 12 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Time frame: T3: post-intervention (week 12)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 16 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Time frame: T4: 1 month follow up (week 16)
Change from baseline sarcopenia at 24 weeks, score ranged from 0 to 20, lower score means lower risk
Time frame: T5: 3 month follow up (week 16)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Sep 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. The datasets of the study will only be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request after the findings being published in peer-reviewed journal.
Related trials for Frailty
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Assessment of Transnational Performance of the Universal Cardiac Surgical Risk Score Across International Sites
Heart Valve Diseases, Cardiac Surgical Procedures
Active, not recruiting
Prehabilitation in Pancreatic Surgery
Pancreatic Cancer, Periampullary Cancer
Not yet recruiting
Eccentric Exercise in Community-dwelling Older Adults
Ageing Well
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Preoperative Frailty and Suboptimal Mask Ventilation in Cardiac Surgery Patients
Frailty, Suboptimal Mask Ventilation
Active, not recruiting
Online Prehabilitation for Patients Awaiting Liver Transplantation
Cirrhosis, Liver, Liver Transplant Surgery
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing exergames and resistance training and Resistance training in people with Frailty and Sacropenia, run by Hong Kong Metropolitan University at 1 site in Hong Kong.
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 4 inclusion and 4 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 18 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Hong Kong. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
Muscle quantity, higher score means better muscle quantity (time frame: T1: baseline (before the study begins)). The study lists 15 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 18 Sep 2025.