Impact of physical activity programs and services for older adults: a rapid review.

IF 5.5
Marina B Pinheiro, Juliana S Oliveira, Jennifer N Baldwin, Leanne Hassett, Nathalia Costa, Heidi Gilchrist, Belinda Wang, Wing Kwok, Bruna S Albuquerque, Luiza R Pivotto, Ana Paula M C Carvalho-Silva, Sweekriti Sharma, Steven Gilbert, Adrian Bauman, Fiona C Bull, Juana Willumsen, Catherine Sherrington, Anne Tiedemann
{"title":"Impact of physical activity programs and services for older adults: a rapid review.","authors":"Marina B Pinheiro, Juliana S Oliveira, Jennifer N Baldwin, Leanne Hassett, Nathalia Costa, Heidi Gilchrist, Belinda Wang, Wing Kwok, Bruna S Albuquerque, Luiza R Pivotto, Ana Paula M C Carvalho-Silva, Sweekriti Sharma, Steven Gilbert, Adrian Bauman, Fiona C Bull, Juana Willumsen, Catherine Sherrington, Anne Tiedemann","doi":"10.1186/s12966-022-01318-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Knowledge of which physical activity programs are most effective for older adults in different sub-populations and contexts is limited. The objectives of this rapid review were to: 1) Overview evidence evaluating physical activity programs/services for older adults; and 2) Describe impact on physical activity, falls, intrinsic capacity (physical domain), functional ability (physical, social, and cognitive/emotional domains), and quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a rapid review of primary studies from 350 systematic reviews identified in a previous scoping review (March 2021: PEDro, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database). For Objective 1, we included intervention studies investigating physical activity programs/services in adults ≥ 60 years. Of these, we included good quality (≥ 6/10 PEDro scale) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥ 50 participants per group in Objective 2.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Objective 1: Of the 1421 intervention studies identified from 8267 records, 79% were RCTs, 87% were in high income countries and 39% were good quality. Objective 2: We identified 87 large, good quality RCTs (26,861 participants). Overall activity promotion, structured exercise and recreation/sport had positive impacts (≥ 50% between-group comparisons positive) across all outcome domains. For overall activity promotion (21 intervention groups), greatest impacts were on physical activity (100% positive) and social outcomes (83% positive). Structured exercise (61 intervention groups) had particularly strong impacts on falls (91% positive), intrinsic capacity (67% positive) and physical functioning (77% positive). Recreation/sport (24 intervention groups) had particularly strong impacts on cognitive/emotional functioning (88% positive). Multicomponent exercise (39 intervention groups) had strong impacts across all outcomes, particularly physical activity (95% positive), falls (90% positive) and physical functioning (81% positive). Results for different populations and settings are presented.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evidence supporting physical activity for older adults is positive. We outline which activity types are most effective in different populations and settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":520799,"journal":{"name":"The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity","volume":" ","pages":"87"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9284866/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-022-01318-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Knowledge of which physical activity programs are most effective for older adults in different sub-populations and contexts is limited. The objectives of this rapid review were to: 1) Overview evidence evaluating physical activity programs/services for older adults; and 2) Describe impact on physical activity, falls, intrinsic capacity (physical domain), functional ability (physical, social, and cognitive/emotional domains), and quality of life.

Methods: We conducted a rapid review of primary studies from 350 systematic reviews identified in a previous scoping review (March 2021: PEDro, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database). For Objective 1, we included intervention studies investigating physical activity programs/services in adults ≥ 60 years. Of these, we included good quality (≥ 6/10 PEDro scale) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥ 50 participants per group in Objective 2.

Results: Objective 1: Of the 1421 intervention studies identified from 8267 records, 79% were RCTs, 87% were in high income countries and 39% were good quality. Objective 2: We identified 87 large, good quality RCTs (26,861 participants). Overall activity promotion, structured exercise and recreation/sport had positive impacts (≥ 50% between-group comparisons positive) across all outcome domains. For overall activity promotion (21 intervention groups), greatest impacts were on physical activity (100% positive) and social outcomes (83% positive). Structured exercise (61 intervention groups) had particularly strong impacts on falls (91% positive), intrinsic capacity (67% positive) and physical functioning (77% positive). Recreation/sport (24 intervention groups) had particularly strong impacts on cognitive/emotional functioning (88% positive). Multicomponent exercise (39 intervention groups) had strong impacts across all outcomes, particularly physical activity (95% positive), falls (90% positive) and physical functioning (81% positive). Results for different populations and settings are presented.

Conclusion: Evidence supporting physical activity for older adults is positive. We outline which activity types are most effective in different populations and settings.

体育活动项目和服务对老年人的影响:快速回顾。
背景:在不同的亚人群和环境中,哪些体育活动计划对老年人最有效的知识是有限的。本快速综述的目的是:1)概述评估老年人体育活动项目/服务的证据;2)描述对身体活动、跌倒、内在能力(身体领域)、功能能力(身体、社会和认知/情感领域)和生活质量的影响。方法:我们对之前的范围综述(2021年3月:PEDro, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane数据库)中确定的350项系统综述的主要研究进行了快速综述。对于目标1,我们纳入了调查≥60岁成人体育活动项目/服务的干预研究。其中,我们在目标2中纳入了高质量(≥6/10 PEDro量表)随机对照试验(rct),每组≥50名受试者。结果:目标1:从8267份记录中确定的1421项干预研究中,79%为随机对照试验,87%为高收入国家,39%为高质量研究。目的2:我们确定了87项大型、高质量的随机对照试验(26,861名受试者)。整体活动促进、有组织的锻炼和娱乐/运动对所有结果域都有积极影响(≥50%组间比较为积极)。对于整体活动促进(21个干预组),对身体活动(100%积极)和社会结果(83%积极)的影响最大。有组织的锻炼(61个干预组)对跌倒(91%为阳性)、内在能力(67%为阳性)和身体功能(77%为阳性)的影响尤其大。娱乐/运动(24个干预组)对认知/情感功能的影响尤其强烈(88%是积极的)。多成分运动(39个干预组)对所有结果都有很强的影响,尤其是身体活动(95%阳性)、跌倒(90%阳性)和身体功能(81%阳性)。给出了不同人群和环境的结果。结论:支持老年人体育锻炼的证据是积极的。我们概述了哪些活动类型在不同的人群和环境中最有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书