Web-Based Versus Print-Based Physical Activity Intervention for Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Crossover Randomized Trial

Background: Fewer than half of older German adults engage in the recommended levels of endurance training. Objective: The study aim is to compare the acceptance and effectiveness of two interventions for physical activity (PA) promotion among initially inactive community-dwelling older adults >= 60 years in a 9-month, crossover randomized trial. Methods: Participants were recruited in person and randomized to one of the following interventions for self-monitoring PA: a print-based intervention (PRINT: 113/242, 46.7%) or a web-based intervention (WEB: 129/242, 53.3%). Furthermore, 29.5% (38/129) of those in the web-based intervention group received a PA tracker in addition to WEB (WEB+). After randomization, the participants and researchers were not blinded. The participants' baseline intervention preferences were retrospectively assessed. All the intervention groups were offered 10 weekly face-to-face group sessions. Afterward, participants could choose to stay in their group or cross over to one of the other groups, and group sessions were continued monthly for another 6 months. 3D accelerometers to assess PA and sedentary behavior (SB) at baseline (T0), 3-month follow-up (T1), and 9-month follow-up (T2) were used. Adherence to PA recommendations, attendance of group sessions, and intervention acceptance were assessed using self-administered paper-based questionnaires. Linear mixed models were used to calculate differences in moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) and SB between time points and intervention groups. Results: Of the 242 initially recruited participants, 91 (37.6%) were randomized to the WEB group; 38 (15.7%) to the WEB+ group; and 113 (46.7%) to the PRINT group. Overall, 80.6% (195/242) of the participants completed T1. Only 0.4% (1/242) of the participants changed from the WEB group to the PRINT group and 6.2% (15/242) moved from the PRINT group to the WEB group (WEB-WEB: 103/249, (41.4%); PRINT-PRINT: 76/249, 30.5%) when offered to cross over at T1. Furthermore, 66.1% (160/242) of participants completed T2. MVPA in minutes per day increased between baseline and T1, but these within-group changes disappeared after adjusting for covariates. MVPA decreased by 9 minutes per day between baseline and T2 (beta(time)=-9.37, 95% CI -18.58 to -0.16), regardless of the intervention group (WEB vs PRINT: beta(group*time)=-3.76, 95% CI -13.33 to 5.82, WEB+ vs PRINT: beta(group*time)=1.40, 95% CI -11.04 to 13.83). Of the participants, 18.6% (38/204) met the PA recommendations at T0, 16.4% (26/159) at T1, and 20.3% (28/138) at T2. For SB, there were no significant group differences or group-by-time interactions at T1 or T2. Intervention acceptance was generally high. The use of intervention material was high to moderate at T1 and decreased by T2. Conclusions: There was little movement between intervention groups at T1 when given the choice, and participation was not associated with increases in PA or decreases in SB over time.

Automated summary

This study compared the acceptance and effectiveness of two interventions for promoting physical activity in older adults. The results showed that there was little movement between intervention groups when given the choice, and participation was not associated with increases in physical activity or decreases in sedentary behavior over time.