Effects of a Physical Activity Intervention on Measures of Physical Performance: Results of the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders Pilot (LIFE-P) Study

Background. The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), which includes walking, balance, and chair stands tests, independently predicts mobility disability and activities of daily living disability. To date, however, there is no definitive evidence from randomized controlled trials that SPPB scor...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2006-11, Vol.61 (11), p.1157-1165
Hauptverfasser: Pahor, Marco, Blair, Steven N, Espeland, Mark, Fielding, Roger, Gill, Thomas M, Guralnik, Jack M, Hadley, Evan C, King, Abby C, Kritchevsky, Stephen B, Maraldi, Cinzia, Miller, Michael E, Newman, Anne B, Rejeski, Walter J, Romashkan, Sergei, Studenski, Stephanie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background. The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), which includes walking, balance, and chair stands tests, independently predicts mobility disability and activities of daily living disability. To date, however, there is no definitive evidence from randomized controlled trials that SPPB scores can be improved. Our objective was to assess the effect of a comprehensive physical activity (PA) intervention on the SPPB and other physical performance measures. Methods. A total of 424 sedentary persons at risk for disability (ages 70–89 years) were randomized to a moderate-intensity PA intervention or a successful aging (SA) health education intervention and were followed for an average of 1.2 years. Results. The mean baseline SPPB score on a scale of 0–12, with 12 corresponding to highest performance, was 7.5. At 6 and 12 months, the PA versus SA group adjusted SPPB (± standard error) scores were 8.7 ± 0.1 versus 8.0 ± 0.1, and 8.5 ± 0.1 versus 7.9 ± 0.2, respectively (p
ISSN:1079-5006
1758-535X
DOI:10.1093/gerona/61.11.1157