Marcia R Franco1, Kirsten Howard2, Catherine Sherrington1, Paulo H Ferreira3, John Rose4, Juliana L Gomes5, Manuela L Ferreira1. 1. The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney Medical School. 2. Sydney School of Public Health. 3. Faculty of Health Science, The University of Sydney. 4. UniSA Business School, The University of South Australia, Adelaide; Business School, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 5. Faculty of Medicine, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
QUESTION: What relative value do older people with a previous fall or mobility-related disability attach to different attributes of exercise? DESIGN: Prospective, best-worst scaling study. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and twenty community-dwelling people, aged 60 years or older, who presented with a previous fall or mobility-related disability. METHODS: Online or face-to-face questionnaire. OUTCOME MEASURES: Utility values for different exercise attributes and levels. The utility levels were calculated by asking participants to select the attribute that they considered to be the best (ie, they were most likely to want to participate in programs with this attribute) and worst (ie, least likely to want to participate). The attributes included were: exercise type; time spent on exercise per day; frequency; transport type; travel time; out-of-pocket costs; reduction in the chance of falling; and improvement in the ability to undertake tasks inside and outside of home. RESULTS: The attributes of exercise programs with the highest utility values were: home-based exercise and no need to use transport, followed by an improvement of 60% in the ability to do daily tasks at home, no costs, and decreasing the chances of falling to 0%. The attributes with the lowest utility were travel time of 30 minutes or more and out-of-pocket costs of AUD50 per session. CONCLUSION: The type of exercise, travel time and costs are more highly valued by older people than the health benefits. These findings suggest that physical activity engagement strategies need to go beyond education about health benefits and focus on improving accessibility to exercise programs. Exercise that can be undertaken at or close to home without any cost is most likely to be taken up by older people with past falls and/or mobility-related disability.
QUESTION: What relative value do older people with a previous fall or mobility-related disability attach to different attributes of exercise? DESIGN: Prospective, best-worst scaling study. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and twenty community-dwelling people, aged 60 years or older, who presented with a previous fall or mobility-related disability. METHODS: Online or face-to-face questionnaire. OUTCOME MEASURES: Utility values for different exercise attributes and levels. The utility levels were calculated by asking participants to select the attribute that they considered to be the best (ie, they were most likely to want to participate in programs with this attribute) and worst (ie, least likely to want to participate). The attributes included were: exercise type; time spent on exercise per day; frequency; transport type; travel time; out-of-pocket costs; reduction in the chance of falling; and improvement in the ability to undertake tasks inside and outside of home. RESULTS: The attributes of exercise programs with the highest utility values were: home-based exercise and no need to use transport, followed by an improvement of 60% in the ability to do daily tasks at home, no costs, and decreasing the chances of falling to 0%. The attributes with the lowest utility were travel time of 30 minutes or more and out-of-pocket costs of AUD50 per session. CONCLUSION: The type of exercise, travel time and costs are more highly valued by older people than the health benefits. These findings suggest that physical activity engagement strategies need to go beyond education about health benefits and focus on improving accessibility to exercise programs. Exercise that can be undertaken at or close to home without any cost is most likely to be taken up by older people with past falls and/or mobility-related disability.
Authors: Manuel Montero-Odasso; Nathalie van der Velde; Finbarr C Martin; Mirko Petrovic; Maw Pin Tan; Jesper Ryg; Sara Aguilar-Navarro; Neil B Alexander; Clemens Becker; Hubert Blain; Robbie Bourke; Ian D Cameron; Richard Camicioli; Lindy Clemson; Jacqueline Close; Kim Delbaere; Leilei Duan; Gustavo Duque; Suzanne M Dyer; Ellen Freiberger; David A Ganz; Fernando Gómez; Jeffrey M Hausdorff; David B Hogan; Susan M W Hunter; Jose R Jauregui; Nellie Kamkar; Rose-Anne Kenny; Sarah E Lamb; Nancy K Latham; Lewis A Lipsitz; Teresa Liu-Ambrose; Pip Logan; Stephen R Lord; Louise Mallet; David Marsh; Koen Milisen; Rogelio Moctezuma-Gallegos; Meg E Morris; Alice Nieuwboer; Monica R Perracini; Frederico Pieruccini-Faria; Alison Pighills; Catherine Said; Ervin Sejdic; Catherine Sherrington; Dawn A Skelton; Sabestina Dsouza; Mark Speechley; Susan Stark; Chris Todd; Bruce R Troen; Tischa van der Cammen; Joe Verghese; Ellen Vlaeyen; Jennifer A Watt; Tahir Masud Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2022-09-02 Impact factor: 12.782
Authors: D Pinto; U Bockenholt; J Lee; R W Chang; L Sharma; D J Finn; A W Heinemann; J L Holl; P Hansen Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Kei Long Cheung; Ben F M Wijnen; Ilene L Hollin; Ellen M Janssen; John F Bridges; Silvia M A A Evers; Mickael Hiligsmann Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Marcia R Franco; Catherine Sherrington; Anne Tiedemann; Leani S Pereira; Monica R Perracini; Claudia R S Faria; Rafael Z Pinto; Carlos M Pastre Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-12-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Glauber Sá Brandão; Glaucia Sá Brandão Freitas Gomes; Glaudson Sá Brandão; Antônia A Callou Sampaio; Claudio F Donner; Luis V F Oliveira; Aquiles Assunção Camelier Journal: Multidiscip Respir Med Date: 2018-01-15