Lee Shinduk, Smith Matthew Lee, Towne Samuel D, Ory Marcia G
Center for Population Health & Aging, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Department of Health Promotion and Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Innov Aging. 2018 Jul 11;2(2):igy016. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igy016. eCollection 2018 Jun.
Evidence suggests participation in evidence-based programs by older adults is effective, yet most studies focus on participation in a single evidence-based program, leaving repeated participation insufficiently understood. We aimed to compare participation in multiple evidence-based programs (repeaters) versus a single evidence-based program (nonrepeaters).
Secondary data analysis was conducted on pre-post longitudinal data targeting older adults participating in evidence-based program(s) in Texas (2013-2016). Surveys included sociodemographic and health-related indicators (e.g., self-rated health, health behaviors, and falls-risks). Mixed-effects models examined pre-post changes in health-related indicators.
Of the 734 study-eligible participants, 145 (20%) participated in two or more evidence-based programs. The participants' average age was 74 years, and the majority was female (80%), non-Hispanic White (79%), or lived in urban or large rural cities/towns (79%). At baseline, repeaters reported less depressive symptomology ( = .049), fewer chronic conditions ( = .048), and less concern of falling ( = .030) than nonrepeaters. Repeaters had better workshop attendance and completion rates ( < .001). Compared to nonrepeaters, repeaters showed significantly-better improvements in communication with physicians ( = .013).
Study findings suggest potential benefits of participation in multiple evidence-based program workshops, but repeaters may have different health profiles than nonrepeaters in natural settings. Future evaluations should consider participants' past participations in evidence-based programs. Further research is needed to build more comprehensive evidence about the incremental benefits of participation in multiple evidence-based programs.
有证据表明,老年人参与循证项目是有效的,但大多数研究聚焦于参与单个循证项目,而对重复参与的情况了解不足。我们旨在比较参与多个循证项目者(重复参与者)与参与单个循证项目者(非重复参与者)的情况。
对2013 - 2016年在得克萨斯州参与循证项目的老年人的前后纵向数据进行二次数据分析。调查内容包括社会人口统计学和健康相关指标(如自评健康、健康行为和跌倒风险)。混合效应模型检验了健康相关指标的前后变化。
在734名符合研究条件的参与者中,145名(20%)参与了两个或更多循证项目。参与者的平均年龄为74岁,大多数为女性(80%)、非西班牙裔白人(79%),或居住在城市或大型农村城镇(79%)。在基线时,重复参与者报告的抑郁症状较少(P = 0.049)、慢性病较少(P = 0.048),且对跌倒的担忧较少(P = 0.030)。重复参与者的工作坊出勤率和完成率更高(P < 0.001)。与非重复参与者相比,重复参与者在与医生沟通方面的改善显著更好(P = 0.013)。
研究结果表明参与多个循证项目工作坊可能有潜在益处,但在自然环境中,重复参与者的健康状况可能与非重复参与者不同。未来的评估应考虑参与者过去参与循证项目的情况。需要进一步研究以建立更全面的证据,说明参与多个循证项目的增量益处。