Self-monitored versus supervised walking programs for older adults.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to compare the outcomes and behavioral changes between self-monitored and supervised walking interventions for older adults.
Results Summary
Both self-monitored and supervised walking improved most physical functions, particularly lower-extremity performance, with no significant differences except for BMI and cardiopulmonary endurance. The supervised group showed improvements in BMI, muscle strength, and balance, while the self-monitored group improved in knee extension muscle strength and mobility.
Population
Older adults
Effective Dosage
Not specified (pedometer-assisted walking)
Duration
3 months
Interactions
None mentioned
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
self-monitored walking | increase | knee extension muscle strength | older adults | - | significantly improved | #1 |
self-monitored walking | increase | Timed Up and Go test | older adults | - | significantly improved | #2 |
supervised walking | decrease | body mass index | older adults | - | significantly improved | #3 |
supervised walking | increase | knee extension muscle strength | older adults | - | significantly improved | #4 |
supervised walking | increase | 30-s sit-to-stand | older adults | - | significantly improved | #5 |
supervised walking | increase | functional reach | older adults | - | significantly improved | #6 |
supervised walking | decrease | 5-m gait speed | older adults | - | significantly slower | #7 |
self-monitored walking | increase | most physical functions | older adults | - | benefit | #8 |
supervised walking | increase | most physical functions | older adults | - | benefit | #9 |
self-monitored walking | no change | effects | older adults | - | do not differ significantly | #10 |
supervised walking | no change | effects | older adults | - | do not differ significantly | #11 |
Walking is an effective, well accepted, inexpensive, and functional intervention. This study compared the outcomes and changes in walking behavior of self-monitored (SM) and supervised (SU) walking interventions for older adults.Participants were assigned to SM (n = 21) and SU (n = 21) walking groups according to their place of residence. Both groups exercised and wore a pedometer for 3 months.The outcome measures were step count, body mass index (BMI), and physical function. Two-way repeated-measure ANOVA and independent t tests were used to compare the intervention effects. We also plotted the trends and analyzed the walking steps weekly.Only BMI exhibited a group × time interaction. The pre-posttest differences showed knee extension muscle strength (KEMS) and Timed Up and Go test were significantly improved in the SM group, whereas BMI, KEMS, 30-s sit-to-stand, functional reach were significantly improved, but 5-m gait speed significantly slower in the SU group. For participants attending ≥50% of the sessions, those in the SM and SU groups had similar results for all variables, except for 2-min step (2MS) and daily walking step counts.Both self-monitored and supervised walking benefit older adults in most physical functions, especially lower-extremity performance, such as muscle strength, balance, and mobility. The effects of both programs do not differ significantly, except for BMI and 2MS (ie cardiopulmonary endurance). We recommend pedometer-assisted self-monitored walking for older adults because of its ability to cultivate exercise habits over the long term, whereas supervised walking to establish effective exercise intensity.