Activity adherence and physical function in older adults with functional limitations.

Nutrition, Exercise Physiology, and Sarcopenia Laboratory, Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
Medicine &amp Science in Sports &amp Exercise (Impact Factor: 4.46). 11/2007; 39(11):1997-2004. DOI: 10.1249/mss.0b013e318145348d
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders Pilot (LIFE-P) was a trial to examine the effects of a physical activity intervention (PA) compared with a health education control (SA) on measures of disability risk in sedentary older adults (N = 424). We examined adherence to the LIFE-P PA intervention for the first 12 months of the trial.
The PA intervention consisted of walking, strength, flexibility, and balance training supplemented with behavioral skills training modules, and it used a phased, center-based schedule of adoption (3x wk(-1), weeks 1-8), transition (2x wk(-1), weeks 9-24), and maintenance (1x wk(-1), weeks 25 to end of trial) while transitioning to primarily home-based physical activity. SA consisted of weekly (weeks 1-26) transitioning to monthly health education workshops.
Participation in moderate-intensity physical activity increased from baseline to months 6 and 12 in PA compared with SA (P < 0.001). At 12 months, PA participants who reported > or = 150 min x wk(-1) of moderate activity demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in their Short Physical Performance Battery score compared with participants who reported < 150 min.wk of moderate activity (P < 0.017). For the PA arm, center-based attendance was 76.3 +/- 24.5, 65.4 +/- 28.6, and 49.8 +/- 35.8% in the adoption, transition, and maintenance phases, respectively.
Adherence to physical activity in LIFE-P was associated with greater improvement in SPPB score and was consistent with adherence in physical activity trials of shorter duration in this subgroup of older adults. Older individuals at risk for disability can adhere to a regular program of physical activity in a long-term randomized trial.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To describe the interindividual variability in physical function responses to supervised resistance and aerobic exercise training interventions in older adults.DesignData analysis of two randomized, controlled exercise trials.SettingCommunity-based research centers.ParticipantsOverweight and obese (body mass index (BMI) ≥27.0 kg/m2) sedentary men and women aged 65 to 79 (N = 95).InterventionFive months of 4 d/wk of aerobic training (AT, n = 40) or 3 d/wk of resistance training (RT, n = 55).MeasurementsPhysical function assessments: global measure of lower extremity function (Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)), 400-m walk, peak aerobic capacity (VO2peak), and knee extensor strength.ResultsOn average, both exercise interventions significantly improved physical function. For AT, there was a 7.9% increase in VO2peak; individual absolute increases varied from 0.4 to 4.3 mL/kg per minute, and four participants (13%) showed no change or a decrease in VO2peak. For RT, knee extensor strength improved an average of 8.1%; individual increases varied from 1.2 to 63.7 Nm, and 16 participants (30%) showed no change or a decrease in strength. Usual gait speed, 400-m walk time, chair rise time, and SPPB improved for the majority of AT participants and usual gait speed, chair rise time, and SPPB improved for the majority of RT participants, but there was wide variation in the magnitude of improvement. Only change in 400-m walk time with RT was related to exercise adherence (correlation coefficient = −0.31, P = .004).Conclusion Despite sufficient levels of adherence to both exercise interventions, some participants did not improve function, and the magnitude of improvement varied widely. Additional research is needed to identify factors that optimize responsiveness to exercise to maximize its functional benefits in older adults.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 03/2015; DOI:10.1111/jgs.13322 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Question: How has adherence been measured in recent prospective studies focusing on adherence to exercise programs among older people? What is the range of adherence rates? Which factors are associated with better adherence? Design: Systematic review of prospective studies that had a primary aim of assessing adherence to exercise programs. Participants: Older people undertaking exercise programs. Intervention: Exercise programs. Outcome measures: Measures of adherence, adherence rates and factors associated with adherence. Results: Nine eligible papers were identified. The most common adherence measures were the proportion of participants completing exercise programs (ie, did not cease participation, four studies, range 65 to 86%), proportion of available sessions attended (five studies, range 58 to 77%) and average number of home exercise sessions completed per week (two studies, range 1.5 to 3 times per week). Adherence rates were generally higher in supervised programs. The person-level factors associated with better adherence included: demographic factors (higher socioeconomic status, living alone); health status (fewer health conditions, better self-rated health, taking fewer medications); physical factors (better physical abilities); and psychological factors (better cognitive ability, fewer depressive symptoms). Conclusion: Older people's adherence to exercise programs is most commonly measured with dropout and attendance rates and is associated with a range of program and personal factors. [Picorelli AMA, Pereira LSM, Pereira DS, Felicio D, Sherrington C (2014) Adherence to exercise programs for older people is influenced by program characteristics and personal factors: a systematic review.Journal of Physiotherapy60:XXX-XXX.].
    Journal of physiotherapy 08/2014; 60(3). DOI:10.1016/j.jphys.2014.06.012 · 2.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with CKD have a high prevalence of cardiovascular disease associated with or exacerbated by inactivity. This randomized, controlled study investigated whether a renal rehabilitation exercise program for patients with stages 3 or 4 CKD would improve their physical function and quality of life. In total, 119 adults with CKD stages 3 and 4 were randomized, and 107 of these patients proceeded to usual care or the renal rehabilitation exercise intervention consisting of usual care plus guided exercise two times per week for 12 weeks (24 sessions). Physical function was determined by three well established performance-based tests: 6-minute walk test, sit-to-stand test, and gait-speed test. Health-related quality of life was assessed by the RAND 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. At baseline, no differences in self-reported level of activity, 6-minute walk test, and sit-to-stand test scores were observed between the usual care (n=48) and renal rehabilitation exercise (n=59) groups, although baseline gait-speed test score was higher in the renal rehabilitation exercise group (P<0.001). At follow-up, the renal rehabilitation exercise group but not the usual care group showed significant improvements in the 6-minute walk test (+210.4±266.0 ft [19% improvement] versus -10±219.9 ft; P<0.001), the sit-to-stand test (+26.9±27% of age prediction [29% improvement] versus +0.7±12.1% of age prediction; P<0.001), and the RAND-36 physical measures of role functioning (P<0.01), physical functioning (P<0.01), energy/fatigue levels (P=0.01), and general health (P=0.03) and mental measure of pain scale (P=0.04). The renal rehabilitation exercise regimen was generally well tolerated. A 12-week/24-session renal rehabilitation exercise program improved physical capacity and quality of life in patients with CKD stages 3 and 4. Longer follow-up is needed to determine if these findings will translate into decreased mortality rates. Copyright © 2014 by the American Society of Nephrology.
    Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 11/2014; 9(12). DOI:10.2215/CJN.11791113 · 5.25 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 31, 2014