Search

Background: Traditionally, exercise programmes for improving functional performance and reducing falls are organised as structured sessions. An alternative approach of integrating functional exercises into everyday tasks has emerged in recent years.Objectives: Summarising the current evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of interventions integrating functional exercise into daily life.Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted including articles based on the following criteria: (1) individuals ≥60 years; (2) intervention studies of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRS); (3) using a lifestyle-integrated approach; (4) using functional exercises to improve strength, balance, or physical functioning; and (5) reporting outcomes on feasibility and/or effectiveness. Methodological quality of RCTs was evaluated using the PEDro scale.Results: Of 4,415 articles identified from 6 databases, 14 (6 RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. RCT quality was moderate to good. Intervention concepts included (1) the Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) programme integrating exercises into everyday activities and (2) combined programmes using integrated and structured training. Three RCTs evaluated LiFE in community dwellers and reported significantly improved balance, strength, and functional performance compared with controls receiving either no intervention, or low-intensity exercise, or structured exercise. Two of these RCTs reported a significant reduction in fall rate compared with controls receiving either no intervention or low-intensity exercise. Three RCTs compared combined programmes with usual care in institutionalised settings and reported improvements for some (balance, functional performance), but not all (strength, falls) outcomes. NRS showed behavioural change related to LiFE and feasibility in more impaired populations. One NRS comparing a combined home-based programme to a gym-based programme reported greater sustainability of effects in the combined programme.Conclusions: This review provides evidence for the effectiveness of integrated training for improving motor performances in older adults. Single studies suggest advantages of integrated compared with structured training. Combined programmes are positively evaluated in institutionalised settings, while little evidence exists in other populations. In summary, the approach of integrating functional exercise into daily life represents a promising alternative or complement to structured exercise programmes. However, more RCTs are needed to evaluate this concept in different target populations and the potential for inducing behavioural change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) intervention has been shown to promote physical activity in fall-prone older adults. However, the underlying mechanisms of how LiFE functions remain unclear. This study compares the effects of the individual and group-based LiFE formats on psychological determinants of behavior change derived from the health action process approach, habit formation theory, and self-determination theory. Methods: Secondary analysis on basis of the randomized, non-inferiority LiFE-is-LiFE trial were performed. Questionnaire data on psychological determinants were obtained from older adults (M = 78.8 years, range 70–95) who took part in either the individual (n = 156) or the group-based (n = 153) LiFE intervention. Measurement points varied from three to six times, and from baseline (T1) up to a 12-month follow-up (T6). A generalized linear mixed model was specified for each determinant. Results: Both LiFE and gLiFE participants reported lower levels of motivational determinants at T6. LiFE participants showed significantly higher values of action planning and coping planning at T6. Participants in both formats showed increased levels of action control at T6, whereas participants' habit strength decreased post-intervention but then stabilized over time. LiFE participants showed higher levels of autonomy, competence, and relatedness throughout the study, but levels of intrinsic motivation did not differ between formats and from T1 to T6. Conclusion: In both formats, but especially in the individual LiFE, the behavior change techniques used affected volitional rather than motivational or general determinants of behavior change. Habit strength as an important indicator of the sustainability of the LiFE exercises stabilized over time, indicating that participants, at least partly, sustained their formed habits long-term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Time commitments, limited access, or unwillingness to join a group are some of the many reasons for low adherence to structured exercise in older adults. A promising alternative approach is integrating exercise into daily routines.Objective: This study tested whether an adapted Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (aLiFE) programme is suitable for adults aged 60-70 years.Methods: The aLiFE approach was evaluated by interviews and focus-groups with participants and trainers following 4-week pre-post intervention pilot study. For data analyses, Framework Approach was used. Coding was managed using NVivo, and subsequently organised into overarching themes.Results: Twenty women and 11 men (mean age 66.4 ± 2.7 years) and 6 trainers (30.0 ± 6.2 years; 5 women) participated. Both participants and trainers were positive about the programme. Participants understood the concept of integrating balance, strength and physical activities into daily lives and valued the individual tailoring in the programme, the preventive approach, and the support of trainers. Trainers valued the flexible approach and peer support between trainers. However, both participants and trainers disliked the extensive study paperwork and reported some challenges to integrate activities into daily routines during the compressed intervention: busy and varied lifestyles, embarrassment performing activities in public, pain, difficulty of specific activities. Participants noted habitualisation of some activities within the short intervention period, even without continuous self-monitoring.Conclusions: aLiFE is a highly acceptable intervention amongst adults aged 60-70 years. Trainers are especially relevant as motivators and support providers. The effectiveness of the aLiFE approach should be tested in a randomised controlled trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) program is an intervention integrating balance and strength activities into daily life, effective at reducing falls in at-risk people ≥70 years. There is potential for LiFE to be adapted to young seniors in order to prevent age-related functional decline.Objective: We aimed to (1) develop an intervention by adapting Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (aLiFE) to be more challenging and suitable for preventing functional decline in young seniors in their 60s and (2) perform an initial feasibility evaluation of the program. Pre-post changes in balance, mobility, and physical activity (PA) were also explored.Methods: Based on a conceptual framework, a multidisciplinary expert group developed an initial aLiFE version, including activities for improving strength, neuromotor performances, and PA. Proof-of-concept was evaluated in a 4-week pre-post intervention study measuring (1) feasibility including adherence, frequency of practice, adverse events, acceptability (i.e., perceived helpfulness, adaptability, level of difficulty of single activities), and safety, and (2) changes in balance/mobility (Community Balance and Mobility Scale) and PA (1 week activity monitoring). The program was refined based on the study results.Results: To test the initial aLiFE version, 31 young seniors were enrolled and 30 completed the study (mean age 66.4 ± 2.7 years, 60% women). Of a maximum possible 16 activities, participants implemented on average 12.1 ± 1.8 activities during the intervention, corresponding to mean adherence of 76%. Implemented activities were practiced 3.6-6.1 days/week and 1.8-7.8 times/day, depending on the activity type. One noninjurious fall occurred during practice, although the participant continued the intervention. The majority found the activities helpful, adaptable to individual lifestyle, appropriately difficult, and safe. CMBS score increased with medium effect size (d = 0.72, p = 0.001). Increase in daily walking time (d = 0.36) and decrease in sedentary time (d = -0.10) were nonsignificant. Refinements included further increasing the task challenge of some strength activities and defining the most preferred activities in the trainer's manual to facilitate uptake of the program.Conclusion: aLiFE has the potential to engage young seniors in regular lifestyle-integrated activities. Effectiveness needs to be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]