4.1 Article

Effects of a Multicomponent Exercise and Therapeutic Lifestyle (CERgAS) Intervention on Gait Function in Lower-Income Urban-Dwelling Older Adults: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGING AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
卷 31, 期 4, 页码 531-540

出版社

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/japa.2022-0047

关键词

Keywords; aged; community-dwelling; public health; community; low income; oral health; nutrition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of a multicomponent exercise and therapeutic lifestyle intervention at improving gait speed among older people in an urban poor setting in Malaysia. The results showed significant changes in gait speed between baseline and 6 months postintervention, but no significant differences were found between the intervention and control groups. Future efforts should focus on introducing physical activity monitoring and increasing exercise duration, frequency, and intensity to improve gait speed.
This study aims to determine the effectiveness of a multicomponent exercise and therapeutic lifestyle (CERgAS) intervention at improving gait speed among older people in an urban poor setting in Malaysia. A total of 249 participants were divided into the intervention (n = 163) and control (n = 86) groups. The mean (SD) age of participants was 67.83 (6.37) and consisted of 88 (35.3%) males and 161 (64.7%) females. A generalized estimating equation with an intention-to-treat analysis was used to measure gait speed at four time points, baseline (T0), 6 weeks (T1), 3 months postintervention (T2), and 6 months postintervention (T3). The results showed significant changes for time between T0 and T3 (mean difference = 0.0882, p = .001), whereas no significant association were found for group (p = .650) and interaction (p = .348) effects. A 6-week intervention is inadequate to improve gait speed. Future efforts should introduce physical activity monitoring and increase exercise duration, frequency, and intensity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据