Yi-Jia Lin , Wei-Chun Hsu , Kai Chen Wang , Wan-Yan Tseng , Ying-Yi Liao
{"title":"互动式拳击-自行车运动对体弱和先天性体弱老年人的体弱和活动受限的影响：随机对照试验","authors":"Yi-Jia Lin , Wei-Chun Hsu , Kai Chen Wang , Wan-Yan Tseng , Ying-Yi Liao","doi":"10.1016/j.rehab.2024.101819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Frailty is common among older adults, often associated with activity limitations during physical and walking tasks. The interactive boxing-cycling combination has the potential to be an innovative and efficient training method, and our hypothesis was that interactive boxing-cycling would be superior to stationary cycling in improving frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To examine the impact of interactive boxing-cycling on frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults compared to stationary cycling.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>A single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Forty-five participants who met at least one frailty phenotype criteria were randomly assigned to receive either interactive boxing-cycling (<em>n</em> = 23) or stationary-cycling (<em>n</em> = 22) for 36 sessions over 12 weeks. The interactive boxing-cycling was performed on a cycle boxer bike with an interactive boxing panel fixed in front of the bike. The primary outcomes were frailty status, including score and phenotypes. Secondary outcomes included activity limitations during physical and walking tasks. The pre- and post-intervention data of both groups were analyzed using a repeated measures two-way ANOVA.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Both types of cycling significantly improved frailty scores (<em>p</em><0.001). Interactive boxing-cycling was more effective than stationary cycling in reversing the frailty phenotype of muscle weakness (<em>p</em> = 0.03, odds ratio 9.19) and demonstrated greater improvements than stationary cycling in arm curl (<em>p</em> = 0.002, η<sup>2</sup>=0.20), functional reach (<em>p</em> = 0.001, η<sup>2</sup>=0.22), and grip strength (<em>p</em> = 0.02, η<sup>2</sup>=0.12) tests. Additionally, interactive boxing-cycling exhibited a greater effect on gait speed (<em>p</em> = 0.02, η<sup>2</sup>=0.13) and gait variability (<em>p</em> = 0.01, η<sup>2</sup>=0.14) during dual-task walking.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In frail and prefrail older adults, interactive boxing-cycling effectively improves frailty but is not superior to stationary cycling. However, it is more effective at improving certain activity limitations.</p></div><div><h3>Registration number</h3><p>TCTR20220328001</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56030,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine","volume":"67 4","pages":"Article 101819"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interactive boxing–cycling on frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults: A randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Yi-Jia Lin , Wei-Chun Hsu , Kai Chen Wang , Wan-Yan Tseng , Ying-Yi Liao\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rehab.2024.101819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Frailty is common among older adults, often associated with activity limitations during physical and walking tasks. The interactive boxing-cycling combination has the potential to be an innovative and efficient training method, and our hypothesis was that interactive boxing-cycling would be superior to stationary cycling in improving frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To examine the impact of interactive boxing-cycling on frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults compared to stationary cycling.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>A single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Forty-five participants who met at least one frailty phenotype criteria were randomly assigned to receive either interactive boxing-cycling (<em>n</em> = 23) or stationary-cycling (<em>n</em> = 22) for 36 sessions over 12 weeks. The interactive boxing-cycling was performed on a cycle boxer bike with an interactive boxing panel fixed in front of the bike. The primary outcomes were frailty status, including score and phenotypes. Secondary outcomes included activity limitations during physical and walking tasks. The pre- and post-intervention data of both groups were analyzed using a repeated measures two-way ANOVA.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Both types of cycling significantly improved frailty scores (<em>p</em><0.001). Interactive boxing-cycling was more effective than stationary cycling in reversing the frailty phenotype of muscle weakness (<em>p</em> = 0.03, odds ratio 9.19) and demonstrated greater improvements than stationary cycling in arm curl (<em>p</em> = 0.002, η<sup>2</sup>=0.20), functional reach (<em>p</em> = 0.001, η<sup>2</sup>=0.22), and grip strength (<em>p</em> = 0.02, η<sup>2</sup>=0.12) tests. Additionally, interactive boxing-cycling exhibited a greater effect on gait speed (<em>p</em> = 0.02, η<sup>2</sup>=0.13) and gait variability (<em>p</em> = 0.01, η<sup>2</sup>=0.14) during dual-task walking.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In frail and prefrail older adults, interactive boxing-cycling effectively improves frailty but is not superior to stationary cycling. However, it is more effective at improving certain activity limitations.</p></div><div><h3>Registration number</h3><p>TCTR20220328001</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine\",\"volume\":\"67 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 101819\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877065724000034\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877065724000034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Interactive boxing–cycling on frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults: A randomized controlled trial
Background
Frailty is common among older adults, often associated with activity limitations during physical and walking tasks. The interactive boxing-cycling combination has the potential to be an innovative and efficient training method, and our hypothesis was that interactive boxing-cycling would be superior to stationary cycling in improving frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults.
Objective
To examine the impact of interactive boxing-cycling on frailty and activity limitations in frail and prefrail older adults compared to stationary cycling.
Materials and methods
A single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Forty-five participants who met at least one frailty phenotype criteria were randomly assigned to receive either interactive boxing-cycling (n = 23) or stationary-cycling (n = 22) for 36 sessions over 12 weeks. The interactive boxing-cycling was performed on a cycle boxer bike with an interactive boxing panel fixed in front of the bike. The primary outcomes were frailty status, including score and phenotypes. Secondary outcomes included activity limitations during physical and walking tasks. The pre- and post-intervention data of both groups were analyzed using a repeated measures two-way ANOVA.
Results
Both types of cycling significantly improved frailty scores (p<0.001). Interactive boxing-cycling was more effective than stationary cycling in reversing the frailty phenotype of muscle weakness (p = 0.03, odds ratio 9.19) and demonstrated greater improvements than stationary cycling in arm curl (p = 0.002, η2=0.20), functional reach (p = 0.001, η2=0.22), and grip strength (p = 0.02, η2=0.12) tests. Additionally, interactive boxing-cycling exhibited a greater effect on gait speed (p = 0.02, η2=0.13) and gait variability (p = 0.01, η2=0.14) during dual-task walking.
Conclusion
In frail and prefrail older adults, interactive boxing-cycling effectively improves frailty but is not superior to stationary cycling. However, it is more effective at improving certain activity limitations.
期刊介绍：
Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine covers all areas of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine; such as: methods of evaluation of motor, sensory, cognitive and visceral impairments; acute and chronic musculoskeletal disorders and pain; disabilities in adult and children ; processes of rehabilitation in orthopaedic, rhumatological, neurological, cardiovascular, pulmonary and urological diseases.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
