首页> 外文OA文献 >On Your Feet to Earn Your Seat::pilot RCT of a theory-based sedentary behaviour reduction intervention for older adults
【2h】

On Your Feet to Earn Your Seat::pilot RCT of a theory-based sedentary behaviour reduction intervention for older adults

机译:脚上的座位::基于理论的老年人久坐行为减少干预试验RCT

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BackgroundOf all age groups, older adults spend most of the time sitting and are least physically active. This sequential, mixed-methods feasibility study used a randomised controlled trial design to assess methods for trialling a habit-based intervention to displace older adults’ sedentary behaviour with light activity and explore impact on behavioural outcomes.MethodsEligibility criteria were age 60–74 years, retired, and ≥6 h/day leisure sitting. Data were collected across four sites in England. The intervention comprised a booklet outlining 15 ‘tips’ for disrupting sedentary habits and integrating activity habits into normally inactive settings, and eight weekly self-monitoring sheets. The control was a non-habit-based factsheet promoting activity and sedentary reduction. A computer-generated 1:1 block-randomisation schedule was used, with participants blinded to allocation. Participants self-reported sedentary behaviour (two indices), sedentary habit, physical activity (walking, moderate, vigorous activity) and activity habit, at pre-treatment baseline, 8- and 12-week follow-ups and were interviewed at 12 weeks. Primary feasibility outcomes were attrition, adverse events and intervention adherence. The secondary outcome was behavioural change.ResultsOf 104 participants consented, 103 were randomised (intervention N = 52, control N = 51). Of 98 receiving allocated treatment, 91 (93%; intervention N = 45; control N = 46) completed the trial. One related adverse event was reported in the intervention group. Mean per-tip adherence across 7 weeks was ≥50% for 9/15 tips. Qualitative data suggested acceptability of procedures, and, particularly among intervention recipients, the allocated treatment. Both groups appeared to reduce sedentary behaviour and increase their physical activity, but there were no apparent differences between groups in the extent of change.ConclusionsTrial methods were acceptable and feasible, but the intervention conferred no apparent advantage over control, though it was not trialled among the most sedentary and inactive population for whom it was developed. Further development of the intervention may be necessary prior to a large-scale definitive trial. One possible refinement would combine elements of the intervention with an informational approach to enhance effectiveness.
机译:背景在所有年龄段中,老年人大部分时间都在坐着,并且身体活动最少。这项循序渐进,混合方法的可行性研究使用了一项随机对照试验设计,评估了试行以习惯为基础的干预措施的方法,这些干预措施以轻度活动取代了老年人的久坐行为,并探讨了对行为结果的影响。方法资格标准为60-74岁,退休,每天≥6小时的休闲时间。在英格兰的四个地点收集了数据。干预措施包括一本小册子,概述了15个“小窍门”,这些小窍门用于打破久坐的习惯并将活动习惯融入通常不活跃的环境中,并提供每周八次自我监控表。对照是基于非习惯的情况说明书,可促进活动和减少久坐感。使用计算机生成的1:1块随机化时间表,参与者不愿分配。参与者在治疗前基线,8周和12周的随访中自我报告了久坐行为(两个指标),久坐习惯,身体活动(步行,中度,剧烈运动)和活动习惯,并在12周时接受了访谈。主要的可行性结果是损耗,不良事件和干预依从性。次要结果是行为改变。结果104名参与者被同意,其中103名被随机分配(干预N = 52,对照组N = 51)。在接受分配治疗的98名患者中,有91名(93%;干预N = 45;对照组N = 46)完成了试验。干预组报告了一项相关的不良事件。 9/15技巧的7周平均每技巧依从性≥50%。定性数据表明手术的可接受性,特别是在接受干预者中,分配的治疗可接受。两组似乎都减少了久坐的行为并增加了他们的体育锻炼,但是两组之间在改变程度上没有明显差异。结论试验方法是可以接受和可行的,但是干预措施没有比控制措施有明显的优势,尽管没有在人群中进行试验。为其开发的最久坐和最不活动的人群。在大规模确定性试验之前,可能需要进一步开发干预措施。一种可能的改进方法是将干预的要素与信息方法相结合,以提高有效性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号