Search

Laura Bragonzoni,1 Giuseppe Barone,1 Francesco Benvenuti,1 Claudio Ripamonti,2 Lucia Lisi,2 Maria Grazia Benedetti,3 Sofia Marini,1 Laura Dallolio,4 Pasqualino Maietta Latessa,1 Raffaele Zinno,1 Giuseppe Audino,1 Wolfgang Kemmler,5 Erika Pinelli1 1Department for Life Quality Studies, Campus of Rimini, University of Bologna, Bologna, Rimini, Italy; 2Center for Osteoporosis and Bone Metabolic Disease, IRCCS Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy; 3Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Unit, IRCCS Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy; 4Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 5Institute of Medical Physics, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, GermanyCorrespondence: Giuseppe Barone, Department for Life Quality Studies, Campus of Rimini, University of Bologna, Via di Barbiano, 1/10, Bologna, Rimini, 40136, Italy, Tel +39 051 636 6507, Email giuseppe.barone8@unibo.itPurpose: We compared two different strategies providing professional coaching to administer an exercise program for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (POP): individual training (IT) at home with trainer’s supervision provided by telephone contacts at regular time-intervals or group training (GT) with trainer’s live supervision. Our working hypothesis was that IT is a valid alternative to GT when GT is not feasible.Patients and Methods: This was a single-blind, randomized study. We recruited 52 women with POP, without significant comorbidity, and no participation in any structured exercise program within the previous 6 months. They were assigned randomly to IT or GT groups (n = 26 each). Distribution of age (IT: 68± 4, GT: 67± 8 years) and body mass index (IT: 23.0± 2.5, GT: 21.4± 5.1) was similar between groups. Each group performed the exercise program in two 1-hour sessions per week for 18 months. Primary outcome measure was Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), as measured by the Short Osteoporosis Quality of Life Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures focused on domains acknowledged to influence HRQoL (disability, fear of falling, weekly physical activity, physical function) or the effectiveness of the exercise program (retention, adherence, and safety). Significance level was set at p < 0.05.Results: No significant differences were observed between IT and GT groups for any domain. Retention, adherence, and safety were also similar. HRQoL, disability and fear of falling did not change between baseline and follow-up for either group. However, for both groups, physical function (knee flexion, shoulder mobility) and functional capacity (6-minute walking test) improved. Weekly physical activity levels increased from moderate range at baseline to intense at final assessment for both groups.Conclusion: IT and GT supervised exercise programs for women with POP provide similar effectiveness, participation and safety. Hence, both modalities should be considered for future translation in clinical practice of exercise recommendations for POP.Keywords: coaching, encouragement, exercise, physical activity, postmenopausal osteoporosis, quality of life