Institute of Medical Sociology, Centre for Health and Society, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Department of Neuromotor Behavior and Exercise, Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2022 Mar 23;10(3):e32212. doi: 10.2196/32212.
Fewer than half of older German adults engage in the recommended levels of endurance training.
The study aim is to compare the acceptance and effectiveness of two interventions for physical activity (PA) promotion among initially inactive community-dwelling older adults ≥60 years in a 9-month, crossover randomized trial.
Participants were recruited in person and randomized to one of the following interventions for self-monitoring PA: a print-based intervention (PRINT: 113/242, 46.7%) or a web-based intervention (WEB: 129/242, 53.3%). Furthermore, 29.5% (38/129) of those in the web-based intervention group received a PA tracker in addition to WEB (WEB+). After randomization, the participants and researchers were not blinded. The participants' baseline intervention preferences were retrospectively assessed. All the intervention groups were offered 10 weekly face-to-face group sessions. Afterward, participants could choose to stay in their group or cross over to one of the other groups, and group sessions were continued monthly for another 6 months. 3D accelerometers to assess PA and sedentary behavior (SB) at baseline (T0), 3-month follow-up (T1), and 9-month follow-up (T2) were used. Adherence to PA recommendations, attendance of group sessions, and intervention acceptance were assessed using self-administered paper-based questionnaires. Linear mixed models were used to calculate differences in moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) and SB between time points and intervention groups.
Of the 242 initially recruited participants, 91 (37.6%) were randomized to the WEB group; 38 (15.7%) to the WEB+ group; and 113 (46.7%) to the PRINT group. Overall, 80.6% (195/242) of the participants completed T1. Only 0.4% (1/242) of the participants changed from the WEB group to the PRINT group and 6.2% (15/242) moved from the PRINT group to the WEB group (WEB-WEB: 103/249, (41.4%); PRINT-PRINT: 76/249, 30.5%) when offered to cross over at T1. Furthermore, 66.1% (160/242) of participants completed T2. MVPA in minutes per day increased between baseline and T1, but these within-group changes disappeared after adjusting for covariates. MVPA decreased by 9 minutes per day between baseline and T2 (β=-9.37, 95% CI -18.58 to -0.16), regardless of the intervention group (WEB vs PRINT: β=-3.76, 95% CI -13.33 to 5.82, WEB+ vs PRINT: β=1.40, 95% CI -11.04 to 13.83). Of the participants, 18.6% (38/204) met the PA recommendations at T0, 16.4% (26/159) at T1, and 20.3% (28/138) at T2. For SB, there were no significant group differences or group-by-time interactions at T1 or T2. Intervention acceptance was generally high. The use of intervention material was high to moderate at T1 and decreased by T2.
There was little movement between intervention groups at T1 when given the choice, and participation was not associated with increases in PA or decreases in SB over time.
German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00016073; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00016073.
德国老年人中,只有不到一半的人参与了推荐水平的耐力训练。
本研究旨在比较两种促进身体活动(PA)的干预措施在最初不活跃的社区居住的 60 岁及以上老年人中的接受度和有效性,这两种干预措施在 9 个月的交叉随机试验中进行。
参与者通过个人招募并随机分配到以下两种用于自我监测 PA 的干预措施之一:基于印刷的干预(PRINT:113/242,46.7%)或基于网络的干预(WEB:129/242,53.3%)。此外,网络干预组的 29.5%(38/129)参与者除了 WEB 外还收到了一个 PA 追踪器(WEB+)。随机分组后,参与者和研究人员没有被蒙蔽。回顾性评估了参与者的基线干预偏好。所有干预组都接受了 10 次每周的面对面小组会议。之后,参与者可以选择留在他们的小组或交叉到另一个小组,并且小组会议每月继续进行另外 6 个月。在基线(T0)、3 个月随访(T1)和 9 个月随访(T2)时使用 3D 加速度计评估 PA 和久坐行为(SB)。使用自我管理的纸质问卷评估 PA 建议的遵守情况、小组会议的出勤率和干预措施的接受程度。使用线性混合模型计算 T1 时的 MVPA 和 SB 之间的差异和干预组之间的差异。
在最初招募的 242 名参与者中,91 名(37.6%)被随机分配到 WEB 组;38 名(15.7%)分到 WEB+组;113 名(46.7%)分到 PRINT 组。总的来说,80.6%(195/242)的参与者完成了 T1。只有 0.4%(1/242)的参与者从 WEB 组转到 PRINT 组,而 6.2%(15/242)的参与者从 PRINT 组转到 WEB 组(WEB-WEB:103/249,(41.4%);PRINT-PRINT:76/249,30.5%)当在 T1 时提供交叉选项时。此外,66.1%(160/242)的参与者完成了 T2。每天的 MVPA 分钟数在基线和 T1 之间增加,但这些组内变化在调整了协变量后消失了。MVPA 在基线和 T2 之间每天减少 9 分钟(β=-9.37,95%CI-18.58 至-0.16),与干预组无关(WEB 与 PRINT:β=-3.76,95%CI-13.33 至 5.82,WEB+与 PRINT:β=1.40,95%CI-11.04 至 13.83)。在参与者中,18.6%(38/204)在 T0 时达到了 PA 建议,16.4%(26/159)在 T1 时达到了,20.3%(28/138)在 T2 时达到了。对于 SB,T1 和 T2 时没有显著的组间差异或组间交互作用。干预措施的接受度通常较高。在 T1 时,干预材料的使用频率较高,到 T2 时有所下降。
当有选择时,T1 时干预组之间的流动很少,参与与 PA 的增加或 SB 的减少无关。
德国临床试验注册处 DRKS00016073;https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00016073。