Comparing preferences to evaluations of barrier self-efficacy for two strength training programs in US older adults.

Autor: Kurth JD; Penn State University, University Park, PA, United States of America.; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States of America., Sciamanna CN; Penn State University, University Park, PA, United States of America.; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States of America., Herrell C; Penn State University, University Park, PA, United States of America.; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States of America., Moeller M; Penn State University, University Park, PA, United States of America.; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States of America., Stine JG; Penn State Health-Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, United States of America.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: PloS one [PLoS One] 2024 May 09; Vol. 19 (5), pp. e0302892. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 May 09 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302892
Abstrakt: Background/objectives: Engagement in regular physical activity is one of the best strategies for older adults to remain healthy. Unfortunately, only 35% of older adults meet guidelines for muscle strengthening activities. Eliciting participant preferences is one possible way to improve physical activity engagement. However, other sources of participant input to improve uptake and maintenance remain uninvestigated. This study compared preferences to self-efficacy ratings for two strength training programs.
Methods: We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of 611 US adults over age 65. We compared two participant evaluations (the preferred program and the program for which they had higher barrier self-efficacy) of two hypothetical strength training programs (45 minutes performed three times per week (traditional) and 5 minutes performed daily (brief)).
Results: Most participants (68%) preferred the brief strength training program. The difference in self-efficacy ratings was an average of 1.2 (SD = 0.92). One in five participants preferred a strength training program for which they had less self-efficacy; nearly all of these participants (92%) preferred the traditional strength training program but had more self-efficacy for the brief strength training program.
Conclusion: Older adults reported preferring and having more self-efficacy for a brief compared to a traditional strength training program. Differences in self-efficacy ratings between the two strength training programs were large. Preferences were often not congruent with ratings of self-efficacy.
Significance/implications: Preferences for strength training programming may not always reflect the program most likely to be maintained. Future investigations should evaluate differences in behavioral uptake, maintenance, and outcomes from two comparative strength training interventions using preferences and self-efficacy.
Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: Christopher Sciamanna has an investment, such as stock, in a company which has begun to investigate the possibility of creating a business that provides exercise programs. All other authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright: © 2024 Kurth et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje