Short-term effects of a park-based group mobility program on increasing outdoor walking in older adults with difficulty walking outdoors: the Getting Older Adults Outdoors (GO-OUT) randomized controlled trial.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY BMC Geriatrics Pub Date : 2024-09-06 DOI:10.1186/s12877-024-05331-4
Nancy M Salbach, Nancy E Mayo, Sandra C Webber, C Allyson Jones, Lisa M Lix, Jacquie Ripat, Theresa Grant, Cornelia van Ineveld, Philip D Chilibeck, Razvan G Romanescu, Susan Scott, Ruth Barclay
{"title":"Short-term effects of a park-based group mobility program on increasing outdoor walking in older adults with difficulty walking outdoors: the Getting Older Adults Outdoors (GO-OUT) randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Nancy M Salbach, Nancy E Mayo, Sandra C Webber, C Allyson Jones, Lisa M Lix, Jacquie Ripat, Theresa Grant, Cornelia van Ineveld, Philip D Chilibeck, Razvan G Romanescu, Susan Scott, Ruth Barclay","doi":"10.1186/s12877-024-05331-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We estimated the short-term effects of an educational workshop and 10-week outdoor walk group (OWG) compared to the workshop and 10 weekly reminders (WR) on increasing outdoor walking (primary outcome) and walking capacity, health-promoting behavior, and successful aging defined by engagement in meaningful activities and well-being (secondary outcomes) in older adults with difficulty walking outdoors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a 4-site, parallel-group randomized controlled trial, two cohorts of community-living older adults (≥ 65 years) reporting difficulty walking outdoors participated. Following a 1-day workshop, participants were stratified and randomized to a 10-week OWG in parks or 10 telephone WR reinforcing workshop content. Masked evaluations occurred at 0, 3, and 5.5 months. We modeled minutes walked outdoors (derived from accelerometry and global positioning system data) using zero-inflated negative binomial regression with log link function, imputing for missing observations. We modeled non-imputed composite measures of walking capacity, health-promoting behavior, and successful aging using generalized linear models with general estimating equations based on a normal distribution and an unstructured correlation matrix. Analyses were adjusted for site, participation on own or with a partner, and cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We randomized 190 people to the OWG (n = 98) and WR interventions (n = 92). At 0, 3, and 5.5 months, median outdoor walking minutes was 22.56, 13.04, and 0 in the OWG, and 24.00, 26.07, and 0 in the WR group, respectively. There was no difference between groups in change from baseline in minutes walked outdoors based on incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) at 3 months (IRR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.47, 1.14) and 5.5 months (IRR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.44, 1.34). Greater 0 to 3-month change in walking capacity was observed in the OWG compared to the WR group (βz-scored difference = 0.14, 95% CI 0.02, 0.26) driven by significant improvement in walking self-efficacy; other comparisons were not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A group, park-based OWG was not superior to WR in increasing outdoor walking activity, health-promoting behavior or successful aging in older adults with difficulty walking outdoors; however, the OWG was superior to telephone WR in improving walking capacity through an increase in walking self-efficacy. Community implementation of the OWG is discussed.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03292510 Date of registration: September 25, 2017.</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378552/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-05331-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We estimated the short-term effects of an educational workshop and 10-week outdoor walk group (OWG) compared to the workshop and 10 weekly reminders (WR) on increasing outdoor walking (primary outcome) and walking capacity, health-promoting behavior, and successful aging defined by engagement in meaningful activities and well-being (secondary outcomes) in older adults with difficulty walking outdoors.

Methods: In a 4-site, parallel-group randomized controlled trial, two cohorts of community-living older adults (≥ 65 years) reporting difficulty walking outdoors participated. Following a 1-day workshop, participants were stratified and randomized to a 10-week OWG in parks or 10 telephone WR reinforcing workshop content. Masked evaluations occurred at 0, 3, and 5.5 months. We modeled minutes walked outdoors (derived from accelerometry and global positioning system data) using zero-inflated negative binomial regression with log link function, imputing for missing observations. We modeled non-imputed composite measures of walking capacity, health-promoting behavior, and successful aging using generalized linear models with general estimating equations based on a normal distribution and an unstructured correlation matrix. Analyses were adjusted for site, participation on own or with a partner, and cohort.

Results: We randomized 190 people to the OWG (n = 98) and WR interventions (n = 92). At 0, 3, and 5.5 months, median outdoor walking minutes was 22.56, 13.04, and 0 in the OWG, and 24.00, 26.07, and 0 in the WR group, respectively. There was no difference between groups in change from baseline in minutes walked outdoors based on incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) at 3 months (IRR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.47, 1.14) and 5.5 months (IRR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.44, 1.34). Greater 0 to 3-month change in walking capacity was observed in the OWG compared to the WR group (βz-scored difference = 0.14, 95% CI 0.02, 0.26) driven by significant improvement in walking self-efficacy; other comparisons were not significant.

Conclusions: A group, park-based OWG was not superior to WR in increasing outdoor walking activity, health-promoting behavior or successful aging in older adults with difficulty walking outdoors; however, the OWG was superior to telephone WR in improving walking capacity through an increase in walking self-efficacy. Community implementation of the OWG is discussed.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03292510 Date of registration: September 25, 2017.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以公园为基础的集体活动项目对增加户外行走困难的老年人户外行走的短期影响:让老年人走出户外(GO-OUT)随机对照试验。
背景:我们估算了教育研讨会和为期 10 周的户外步行小组(OWG)与研讨会和每周 10 次提醒(WR)相比,对增加户外步行(主要结果)、步行能力、健康促进行为以及由参与有意义的活动和幸福感定义的成功老龄化(次要结果)对有户外步行困难的老年人的短期影响:在一项 4 个地点、平行分组的随机对照试验中,有两组社区生活的老年人(≥ 65 岁)参加了试验,他们都表示在户外行走有困难。在为期 1 天的研讨会后,参与者被分层并随机分配到为期 10 周的公园 OWG 或 10 次电话 WR,以强化研讨会的内容。分别在 0 个月、3 个月和 5.5 个月时进行蒙面评估。我们利用零膨胀负二项回归和对数链接函数对户外行走分钟数(来自加速度计和全球定位系统数据)进行了建模,并对缺失的观察数据进行了归因。我们使用基于正态分布和非结构化相关矩阵的一般估计方程的广义线性模型,对步行能力、健康促进行为和成功老龄化的非估计综合指标进行建模。分析根据地点、自己参与或与伙伴参与以及队列进行了调整:我们将 190 人随机分配到 OWG(98 人)和 WR(92 人)干预中。在 0 个月、3 个月和 5.5 个月时,OWG 组的户外步行时间中位数分别为 22.56 分钟、13.04 分钟和 0 分钟,WR 组的户外步行时间中位数分别为 24.00 分钟、26.07 分钟和 0 分钟。根据3个月(IRR = 0.74,95% CI 0.47,1.14)和5.5个月(IRR = 0.77,95% CI 0.44,1.34)的发病率比(IRR)和95%置信区间(CI),各组在户外步行分钟数与基线相比的变化没有差异。在步行自我效能显著提高的推动下,观察到OWG组与WR组相比,0至3个月的步行能力变化更大(βz评分差异=0.14,95% CI 0.02,0.26);其他比较差异不显著:在增加户外步行活动、促进健康行为或成功老龄化方面,以公园为基础的集体户外步行小组并不优于有户外步行困难的老年人;但是,在通过提高步行自我效能感来改善步行能力方面,集体户外步行小组优于电话WR。本文还讨论了在社区实施 OWG 的情况:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03292510 注册日期:2017 年 9 月 25 日:2017年9月25日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Geriatrics
BMC Geriatrics GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
873
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.
期刊最新文献
Factors associated with the occupational balance in caregivers of people with dementia: A cross-sectional study from the ATENEA project. Mazor X robot-assisted upper and lower cervical pedicle screw fixation: a case report and literature review. Sociodemographic and health disparities in self-care difficulties among older individuals: Evidence from South Africa. Association of cognitive performance with overall, dosage, intensity, and domain physical activity in aging: NHANES 2011-2014. Validity and reliability of the TechPH scale in assessing Iranian older adults' attitudes toward technology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1