Back

Restoring Physical Resilience: Consistent Functional and Sarcopenia Gains Across Two Vivifrail Cohorts

Fernandez-Ortega, J.; Loza-Herbella, J.; Rangel-Garcia, J. A.; Fernandez-Revelles, A. B.

2026-10-16 geriatric medicine
10.64898/2026.10.14.26365508 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objectives: To evaluate change in physical function and probable sarcopenia following a 36-week community multicomponent exercise programme (Vivifrail model) across two consecutive cycles, and to assess the consistency of this change between cohorts. Study design: Quasi-experimental, single-arm, repeated-measures service evaluation. Ninety-two older adults (2025-2026 cohort; mean age 75.9 years, 88.0% women) completed baseline and post-intervention assessments; an independent 2024-2025 cohort (n = 86) was analysed jointly for replication (n = 178). Main outcome measures: Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) score (primary); Timed Up and Go (TUG), handgrip strength, 6-metre walk time and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) (secondary); probable sarcopenia (EWGSOP2), SPPB-based frailty category, and a fall-risk indicator computed identically in both cohorts. Results: SPPB improved by a mean of 1.33 points (Cohen's d = 0.96; p < .001), with concordant improvement in all four secondary outcomes (all q < .005). 72.8% reached the substantial minimal clinically important difference. Probable sarcopenia fell from 17.4% to 5.4% (p = .006), and frailty category shifted toward higher functional levels (p < .001). Effect sizes were consistent between cohorts for SPPB, handgrip and 6-metre walk; the Time x Cohort interaction was significant for TUG only. In the pooled sample, elevated fall risk fell from 19.7% to 11.2% (p = .002). Conclusions: A 36-week multicomponent exercise programme was associated with clinically meaningful, reproducible improvement in physical function and a reduction in probable sarcopenia across two independent cohorts. The single-arm design precludes causal inference.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.