Van Roie Evelien, Delecluse Christophe, Opdenacker Joke, De Bock Katrien, Kennis Eva, Boen Filip
Dept. of Biomedical Kinesiology, Leuven Catholic University, Leuven, Belgium.
J Aging Phys Act. 2010 Jul;18(3):335-52. doi: 10.1123/japa.18.3.335.
Two groups of sedentary older adults, participating in either a lifestyle physical activity intervention (LIFE, n = 60) or a structured exercise intervention (STRU, n = 60), were compared with a control group (CO, n = 66) in terms of physical fitness and cardiovascular risk factors. Participants in LIFE were stimulated to integrate physical activity into their daily routines and received an individualized home-based program. Participants in STRU completed 5 supervised training sessions every 2 wk in a fitness center. Both interventions lasted 11 months and focused on endurance, strength, flexibility, and postural/balance exercises. The results revealed that the interventions were equally effective in improving functional performance. STRU was more effective than LIFE in improving cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness. Limited effects emerged on cardiovascular risk, with STRU improving in total cholesterol and HDL. Consequently, interventions aiming at reducing cardiovascular risks among sedentary elderly should focus on long-term changes in physical activity behavior.
将两组久坐不动的老年人,一组参与生活方式体育活动干预(LIFE组,n = 60),另一组参与结构化运动干预(STRU组,n = 60),与对照组(CO组,n = 66)在身体素质和心血管危险因素方面进行了比较。LIFE组的参与者被鼓励将体育活动融入日常生活,并接受个性化的家庭锻炼计划。STRU组的参与者每两周在健身中心完成5次有监督的训练课程。两种干预均持续11个月,重点是耐力、力量、柔韧性和姿势/平衡练习。结果显示,两种干预在改善功能表现方面同样有效。STRU组在改善心肺功能和肌肉力量方面比LIFE组更有效。在心血管危险因素方面出现了有限的效果,STRU组的总胆固醇和高密度脂蛋白有所改善。因此,旨在降低久坐不动老年人心血管风险的干预措施应注重体育活动行为的长期改变。