| Literature DB >> 28152361 |
Hilde A E Geraedts1, Wiebren Zijlstra2,3, Wei Zhang4, Sophie L W Spoorenberg5, Marcos Báez6, Iman Khaghani Far6, Heribert Baldus4, Martin Stevens5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Stimulation of a physically active lifestyle among older adults is essential to health and well-being. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and user opinion of a home-based exercise program supported by a sensor and tablet application for frail older adults.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28152361 PMCID: PMC5303650 DOI: 10.5888/pcd14.160227
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Chronic Dis ISSN: 1545-1151 Impact factor: 2.830
Characteristics of Participants in a Study to Evaluate the Feasibility and User Opinion of a 6-Month Home-Based Exercise Program, Groningen, The Netherlands, 2014
| Variable | All (N = 40) | Completers (n = 21) | Dropouts (n = 19) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Male | 15 | 8 | 7 | .90 |
| Female | 25 | 13 | 12 | |
|
| 81 (4.6) | 80 (4.7) | 83 (4.2) | .06 |
|
| 4.4 (0.5) | 4.4 (0.5) | 4.5 (0.5) | .66 |
|
| 27.9 (4.1) | 28.1 (4.4) | 27.6 (3.7) | .75 |
|
| ||||
| Yes | 25 | 18 | 7 | <.001 |
| No | 15 | 3 | 12 | |
|
| ||||
| Yes | 1 | 1 | 0 | .04 |
| No | 39 | 20 | 19 | |
|
| ||||
| 3G | 17 | 4 | 13 | .04 |
| 4G | 11 | 6 | 5 | |
| Wi-Fi | 12 | 11 | 1 | |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; SD, standard deviation.
P values for difference between completers and dropouts determined by independent-samples t test.
Range of score for Groningen Frailty Indicator is 0 to 15; a score of 4 or 5 indicates a minor elevated chance of loss of functionality and heightened disability (28).
Calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared.
Determined by asking the question “Do you have prior experience with computer, tablet, or smartphone?”
Adherence Ratesa in a Study to Evaluate the Feasibility and User Opinion of a 6-Month Home-Based Exercise Program, Groningen, The Netherlands, 2014b
| Variable | All (N = 40) | By Program Completion | By Type of Internet Service | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Completers (n = 21) | Dropouts (n = 19) |
| 3G (n = 17) | 4G (n = 11) | Wi-Fi (n = 12) |
| ||
| No. of days in intervention (SD) | 126.2 (86.8) | 202.6 (10.8) | 45.7 (49.6) | <.001 | 70.9 (76.0) | 120.6 (90.5) | 188.4 (57.7) | .04 |
| Adherence to exercise program | 60.9 (32.5) | 69.2 (32.2) | 49.9 (30.4) | .05 | 56.8 (31.9) | 60.3 (37.5) | 64.9 (32.1) | .90 |
| Adherence to exercise program during 3 months of supervised exercise | 64.3 (32.1) | 75.8 (29.2) | 49.3 (30.3) | .01 | 56.3 (30.7) | 56.6 (30.2) | 78.8 (33.4) | .35 |
| Adherence to exercise program during 3 months of unsupervised exercise | 60.5 (40.6) | 62.4 (41.9) | 40.5 (18.2) | .44 | 52.3 (45.3) | 75.6 (50.4) | 50.6 (34.5) | .47 |
| Adherence to wearing the sensor | 66.7 (30.7) | 75.7 (27.7) | 54.2 (31.2) | .04 | 62.6 (31.8) | 83.7 (23.0) | 60.8 (31.8) | .21 |
Adherence rates were calculated according to completion of the 5 exercise bouts scheduled each week. For example, if a participant completed 3 of 5 bouts in a week, the adherence rate was calculated as 60%.
All values are mean (standard deviation) percentage unless otherwise indicated.
P values for differences between completers and dropouts determined by independent-samples t test.
P values for differences between type of internet service determined by 1-way analysis of variance.
First 3 months of the 6-month program were supervised by a remote coach.
Second 3 months of the 6-month program were not supervised by a remote coach.
Adherence to wearing the sensor was calculated according to the number of days the sensor was worn with successful collection of data as registered by the sensor.
Number and Densitya of Incidentsb in a Study to Evaluate the Feasibility and User Opinion of a 6-Month Home-Based Exercise Program, Groningen, The Netherlands, 2014
| Variable | All (N = 40) | By Program Completion | By Type of Internet Service | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Completers (N = 21) | Dropouts (N = 19) |
| 3G (n = 17) | 4G (n = 11) | Wi-Fi (n = 12) |
| ||
|
| ||||||||
| No. | 109 | 80 | 60 | .04 | 22 | 29 | 52 | .01 |
| Density | 0.2 (0.5) | 0.2 (0.2) | 0.2 (0.4) | 0.2 (0.3) | 0.2 (0.4) | 0.2 (0.4) | ||
|
| ||||||||
| No. | 111 | 51 | 29 | .001 | 50 | 25 | 27 | .001 |
| Density | 0.4 (0.3) | 0.2 (0.3) | 0.6 (0.5) | 0.7 (0.5) | 0.2 (0.4) | 0.2 (0.4) | ||
|
| ||||||||
| No. | 29 | 22 | 7 | .02 | 6 | 7 | 9 | .88 |
| Density | 0.1 (0.1) | 0.05 (0.08) | 0.1 (0.2) | 0.03 (0.1) | 0.1 (0.2) | 0.05 (0.1) | ||
|
| ||||||||
| No. | 249 | 153 | 96 | .01 | 78 | 61 | 86 | .01 |
| Density | 0.8 (0.8) | 0.4 (0.5) | 1.2 (0.8) | 1.3 (0.8) | 0.4 (0.3) | 0.4 (0.7) | ||
Mean (standard deviation) number of incidents per participant per week.
Problems encountered by participants were divided into 3 categories: technology-related (eg, cable malfunction), connectivity-related (eg, poor internet coverage), and participant-induced (eg, opening incorrect web pages).
P values for differences in density between completers and dropouts determined by independent-samples t test.
P values for differences between type of internet service determined by 1-way analysis of variance.