Socioeconomic differences in the benefits of structured physical activity compared with health education on the prevention of major mobility disability in older adults: the LIFE study.
Socioeconomic differences in the benefits of structured physical activity compared with health education on the prevention of major mobility disability in older adults: the LIFE study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/jech-2016-207321
复制
发表时间：
2016-09
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Life Study investigators
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bann D;Chen H;Bonell C;Glynn NW;Fielding RA;Manini T;King AC;Pahor M;Mihalko SL;Gill TM;Life Study investigators
缺乏证据表明，有利于健康的社区干预措施的有效性是否因社会经济特征而异。我们评估了结构化的身体活动干预对减少老年人活动障碍的益处是否因教育或收入而异。生活方式干预和老年人独立性（LIFE）研究是一项多中心、随机试验，比较了结构化体力活动计划与健康教育计划对高危社区老年人（年龄70-89岁;平均随访2.6年）移动残疾发生率的影响。 教育程度（≤高中（0-12岁），大学（13-17岁）或研究生）和家庭年收入是自我报告的（<24 999美元，25 000美元至49 999美元和≥ 50 000美元）。 使用考克斯回归，分别按社会经济学组比较2个治疗组的残疾风险（客观定义为丧失行走400 m的能力）。社会经济组×干预交互作用的条款进行了测试。研究生教育（0.72，0.51 - 1.03; N=411）与低学历（高中或以下）（0.93，0.70 - 1.24; N=536）相比，降低行动能力残疾发生率的效果更大。然而，教育组×干预相互作用项没有统计学意义（p=0.54）。结果是在同一方向，但不太明显，当家庭收入被用作社会经济指标。在有风险的老年人中进行的最大和最长的体力活动试验中，具有高等教育或收入的人的干预效果最大，但统计相互作用的检验不显著，可能是由于功率不足。NCT01072500。
Evidence is lacking on whether health-benefiting community-based interventions differ in their effectiveness according to socioeconomic characteristics. We evaluated whether the benefit of a structured physical activity intervention on reducing mobility disability in older adults differs by education or income. The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) study was a multicentre, randomised trial that compared a structured physical activity programme with a health education programme on the incidence of mobility disability among at-risk community-living older adults (aged 70–89 years; average follow-up of 2.6 years). Education (≤ high school (0–12 years), college (13–17 years) or postgraduate) and annual household income were self-reported (<$24 999, $25 000 to $49 999 and ≥$50 000). The risk of disability (objectively defined as loss of ability to walk 400 m) was compared between the 2 treatment groups using Cox regression, separately by socioeconomic group. Socioeconomic group×intervention interaction terms were tested. The effect of reducing the incidence of mobility disability was larger for those with postgraduate education (0.72, 0.51 to 1.03; N=411) compared with lower education (high school or less (0.93, 0.70 to 1.24; N=536). However, the education group×intervention interaction term was not statistically significant (p=0.54). Findings were in the same direction yet less pronounced when household income was used as the socioeconomic indicator. In the largest and longest running trial of physical activity amongst at-risk older adults, intervention effect sizes were largest among those with higher education or income, yet tests of statistical interactions were non-significant, likely due to inadequate power. NCT01072500.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1186/1479-5868-10-76
发表时间：
2013-06-15
期刊：
The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity
影响因子：
--
作者：
Humphreys DK;Ogilvie D
通讯作者：
Ogilvie D
影响因子：
6.3
作者：
Demakakos, Panayotes;Biddulph, Jane P.;Marmot, Michael G.
通讯作者：
Marmot, Michael G.
影响因子：
12.7
作者：
Schoeni, RF;Martin, LG;Freedman, VA
通讯作者：
Freedman, VA
DOI：
10.1093/gerona/glt064
发表时间：
2013-12-01
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Marsh, Anthony P.;Lovato, Laura C.;Guralnik, Jack M.
通讯作者：
Guralnik, Jack M.
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
Pahor, Marco;Guralnik, Jack M.;Ambrosius, Walter T.;Blair, Steven;Bonds, Denise E.;Church, Timothy S.;Espeland, Mark A.;Fielding, Roger A.;Gill, Thomas M.;Groessl, Erik J.;King, Abby C.;Kritchevsky, Stephen B.;Manini, Todd M.;McDermott, Mary M.;Miller, Michael E.;Newman, Anne B.;Rejeski, W. Jack;Sink, Kaycee M.;Williamson, Jeff D.
通讯作者：
Williamson, Jeff D.