Katherine A Collins, Kim M Huffman, Ruth Q Wolever, Patrick J Smith, Ilene C Siegler, Leanna M Ross, Elizabeth R Hauser, Rong Jiang, John M Jakicic, Paul T Costa, William E Kraus
{"title":"运动干预辍学的决定因素和坚持程度的变化:STRRIDE 随机试验》。","authors":"Katherine A Collins, Kim M Huffman, Ruth Q Wolever, Patrick J Smith, Ilene C Siegler, Leanna M Ross, Elizabeth R Hauser, Rong Jiang, John M Jakicic, Paul T Costa, William E Kraus","doi":"10.1249/tjx.0000000000000190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to characterize the timing and self-reported determinants of exercise dropout among sedentary adults with overweight or obesity. We also sought to explore variations in adherence among individuals who completed a 6- to 8-month structured exercise intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 947 adults with dyslipidemia [STRRIDE I, STRRIDE AT/RT] or prediabetes [STRRIDE-PD] were enrolled to either control or to one of 10 exercise interventions, ranging from doses of 8-23 kcal/kg/week; intensities of 50%-75% V̇O2 peak; and durations of 6-8 months. Two groups included resistance training and one included dietary intervention (7% weight loss goal). Dropout was defined as an individual who withdrew from the study due a variety of determinants. Timing of intervention dropout was defined as the last session attended and categorized into phases. Exercise training adherence was calculated by dividing weekly minutes or total sets of exercise completed by weekly minutes or total sets of exercise prescribed. General linear models were used to characterize the associations between timing of dropout and determinant category.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to exercise intervention completers (n=652), participants who dropped out (n=295) were on average non-white (98% vs. 80%, p<0.01), had higher body mass index (31.0 kg/m<sup>2</sup> vs. 30.2 kg/m<sup>2</sup>; p<0.01), and were less fit at baseline (25.0 mg/kg/min vs. 26.7 ml/kg/min, p<0.01). Of those who dropped out, 67% did so prior to the start of or while ramping up to the prescribed exercise volume and intensity. The most commonly reported reason for dropout was lack of time (40%). Notably, among individuals who completed the ramp training period, subsequent exercise intervention adherence did not waiver over the ensuing 6-8 months of training.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings are some of the first to delineate associations between the timing of dropout and dropout determinants, providing guidance to future exercise interventions to better support individuals at-risk for dropout.</p>","PeriodicalId":75243,"journal":{"name":"Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9165469/pdf/nihms-1753767.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determinants of Dropout from and Variation in Adherence to an Exercise Intervention: The STRRIDE Randomized Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Katherine A Collins, Kim M Huffman, Ruth Q Wolever, Patrick J Smith, Ilene C Siegler, Leanna M Ross, Elizabeth R Hauser, Rong Jiang, John M Jakicic, Paul T Costa, William E Kraus\",\"doi\":\"10.1249/tjx.0000000000000190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to characterize the timing and self-reported determinants of exercise dropout among sedentary adults with overweight or obesity. We also sought to explore variations in adherence among individuals who completed a 6- to 8-month structured exercise intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 947 adults with dyslipidemia [STRRIDE I, STRRIDE AT/RT] or prediabetes [STRRIDE-PD] were enrolled to either control or to one of 10 exercise interventions, ranging from doses of 8-23 kcal/kg/week; intensities of 50%-75% V̇O2 peak; and durations of 6-8 months. Two groups included resistance training and one included dietary intervention (7% weight loss goal). Dropout was defined as an individual who withdrew from the study due a variety of determinants. Timing of intervention dropout was defined as the last session attended and categorized into phases. Exercise training adherence was calculated by dividing weekly minutes or total sets of exercise completed by weekly minutes or total sets of exercise prescribed. General linear models were used to characterize the associations between timing of dropout and determinant category.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to exercise intervention completers (n=652), participants who dropped out (n=295) were on average non-white (98% vs. 80%, p<0.01), had higher body mass index (31.0 kg/m<sup>2</sup> vs. 30.2 kg/m<sup>2</sup>; p<0.01), and were less fit at baseline (25.0 mg/kg/min vs. 26.7 ml/kg/min, p<0.01). Of those who dropped out, 67% did so prior to the start of or while ramping up to the prescribed exercise volume and intensity. The most commonly reported reason for dropout was lack of time (40%). Notably, among individuals who completed the ramp training period, subsequent exercise intervention adherence did not waiver over the ensuing 6-8 months of training.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings are some of the first to delineate associations between the timing of dropout and dropout determinants, providing guidance to future exercise interventions to better support individuals at-risk for dropout.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75243,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9165469/pdf/nihms-1753767.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1249/tjx.0000000000000190\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1249/tjx.0000000000000190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究旨在分析超重或肥胖的久坐成年人放弃锻炼的时间和自我报告的决定因素。我们还试图探讨完成 6 到 8 个月结构化运动干预的人在坚持运动方面的差异:共有947名患有血脂异常[STRRIDE I、STRRIDE AT/RT]或糖尿病前期[STRRIDE-PD]的成年人参加了对照组或10个运动干预组中的一个,干预剂量为8-23千卡/千克/周;强度为50%-75% V̇O2峰值;持续时间为6-8个月。其中两组包括阻力训练,一组包括饮食干预(目标体重减轻 7%)。辍学是指因各种因素退出研究的人。干预退出的时间定义为参加的最后一次训练,并按阶段进行分类。运动训练坚持率的计算方法是:每周完成的运动分钟数或总组数除以每周规定的运动分钟数或总组数。一般线性模型用于描述辍学时间与决定因素类别之间的关系:结果:与运动干预完成者(652 人)相比,退出者(295 人)平均为非白人(98% vs. 80%,p2 vs. 30.2 kg/m2;p结论:这些发现是首次对运动干预完成者与退出者之间的关系进行研究:这些研究结果首次明确了辍学时间与辍学决定因素之间的关联,为未来的运动干预提供了指导,以更好地支持有辍学风险的个人。
Determinants of Dropout from and Variation in Adherence to an Exercise Intervention: The STRRIDE Randomized Trials.
Purpose: This study aimed to characterize the timing and self-reported determinants of exercise dropout among sedentary adults with overweight or obesity. We also sought to explore variations in adherence among individuals who completed a 6- to 8-month structured exercise intervention.
Methods: A total of 947 adults with dyslipidemia [STRRIDE I, STRRIDE AT/RT] or prediabetes [STRRIDE-PD] were enrolled to either control or to one of 10 exercise interventions, ranging from doses of 8-23 kcal/kg/week; intensities of 50%-75% V̇O2 peak; and durations of 6-8 months. Two groups included resistance training and one included dietary intervention (7% weight loss goal). Dropout was defined as an individual who withdrew from the study due a variety of determinants. Timing of intervention dropout was defined as the last session attended and categorized into phases. Exercise training adherence was calculated by dividing weekly minutes or total sets of exercise completed by weekly minutes or total sets of exercise prescribed. General linear models were used to characterize the associations between timing of dropout and determinant category.
Results: Compared to exercise intervention completers (n=652), participants who dropped out (n=295) were on average non-white (98% vs. 80%, p<0.01), had higher body mass index (31.0 kg/m2 vs. 30.2 kg/m2; p<0.01), and were less fit at baseline (25.0 mg/kg/min vs. 26.7 ml/kg/min, p<0.01). Of those who dropped out, 67% did so prior to the start of or while ramping up to the prescribed exercise volume and intensity. The most commonly reported reason for dropout was lack of time (40%). Notably, among individuals who completed the ramp training period, subsequent exercise intervention adherence did not waiver over the ensuing 6-8 months of training.
Conclusion: These findings are some of the first to delineate associations between the timing of dropout and dropout determinants, providing guidance to future exercise interventions to better support individuals at-risk for dropout.