Delivering an In-Home Exercise Program via Telerehabilitation: A Pilot Study of Lung Transplant Go (LTGO)

We evaluated the feasibility, safety, system usability, and intervention acceptability of Lung Transplant Go (LTGO), an 8-week in-home exercise intervention for lung transplant recipients using a telerehabilitation platform, and described changes in physical function and physical activity from baseline to post-intervention. The intervention was delivered to lung transplant recipients in their home via the Versatile and Integrated System for TeleRehabilitation (VISYTER). The intervention focused on aerobic and strengthening exercises tailored to baseline physical function. Participants improved walk distance (6-minute walk distance), balance (Berg Balance Scale), lower body strength (30-second chair stand test) and steps walked (SenseWear Armband®). No adverse events were reported. Participants rated the program highly positively in regard to the technology and intervention. The telerehabilitation exercise program was feasible, safe, and acceptable. Our findings provide preliminary support for the LTGO intervention to improve physical function and promote physical activity in lung transplant recipients.

Energy Expenditure and Enjoyment of Active Television Viewing

International Journal of Exercise Science 9(1): 64-76, 2016. This study examined energy expenditure and enjoyment during sedentary television viewing (SED-TV), stepping in place during television commercials (COMM-TV), and physical activity prompted by common character phrases/mannerisms within a television program (PA-TV). Adults (N=38, age: 27.0±8.0 years, BMI: 25.4±4.2 kg/m2) completed three 30-minute sessions in random order: SED-TV, COMM-TV, and PA-TV. Energy expenditure and heart rate were assessed during each session. Enjoyment was assessed after the initial experimental session and at completion of the study. Energy expenditure was greater in the active versus sedentary sessions (COMM-TV vs SED-TV: difference = 32.7±1.9 kcal, p3.0 METS was lower in SED-TV (median = 0 minutes) compared to COMM-TV [median = 4.0 minutes (Inter-Quartile Range: 0.8, 7.3)] (p50% of age-predicted maximal heart rate. Both COMM-TV and PA-TV were reported to be significantly more enjoyable than SED-TV. COMM-TV and PA-TV resulted in higher energy expenditure, more minutes of moderate intensity physical activity, and higher reported enjoyment compared to SED-TV. These findings have implications for reducing sedentary time during television viewing, which may impact health-related outcomes. Intervention trials are warranted to determine the effectiveness of these strategies

Anti-müllerian hormone is not associated with cardiometabolic risk factors in adolescent females

<p>Objectives: Epidemiological evidence for associations of Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) with cardiometabolic risk factors is lacking. Existing evidence comes from small studies in select adult populations, and findings are conflicting. We aimed to assess whether AMH is associated with cardiometabolic risk factors in a general population of adolescent females.</p> <p>Methods: AMH, fasting insulin, glucose, HDLc, LDLc, triglycerides and C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured at a mean age 15.5 years in 1,308 female participants in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine associations of AMH with these cardiometabolic outcomes.</p> <p>Results: AMH values ranged from 0.16–35.84 ng/ml and median AMH was 3.57 ng/ml (IQR: 2.41, 5.49). For females classified as post-pubertal (n = 848) at the time of assessment median (IQR) AMH was 3.81 ng/ml (2.55, 5.82) compared with 3.25 ng/ml (2.23, 5.05) in those classed as early pubertal (n = 460, P≤0.001). After adjusting for birth weight, gestational age, pubertal stage, age, ethnicity, socioeconomic position, adiposity and use of hormonal contraceptives, there were no associations with any of the cardiometabolic outcomes. For example fasting insulin changed by 0% per doubling of AMH (95%CI: −3%,+2%) p = 0.70, with identical results if HOMA-IR was used. Results were similar after additional adjustment for smoking, physical activity and age at menarche, after exclusion of 3% of females with the highest AMH values, after excluding those that had not started menarche and after excluding those using hormonal contraceptives.</p> <p>Conclusion: Our results suggest that in healthy adolescent females, AMH is not associated with cardiometabolic risk factors.</p&gt

Interventions outside the workplace for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age

Background Adults spend a majority of their time outside the workplace being sedentary. Large amounts of sedentary behaviour increase the risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and both all‐cause and cardiovascular disease mortality. Objectives Primary • To assess effects on sedentary time of non‐occupational interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age Secondary • To describe other health effects and adverse events or unintended consequences of these interventions • To determine whether specific components of interventions are associated with changes in sedentary behaviour • To identify if there are any differential effects of interventions based on health inequalities (e.g. age, sex, income, employment) Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 14 April 2020. We checked references of included studies, conducted forward citation searching, and contacted authors in the field to identify additional studies. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs of interventions outside the workplace for community‐dwelling adults aged 18 to 59 years. We included studies only when the intervention had a specific aim or component to change sedentary behaviour. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full‐text articles for study eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional information or data when required. We examined the following primary outcomes: device‐measured sedentary time, self‐report sitting time, self‐report TV viewing time, and breaks in sedentary time. Main results We included 13 trials involving 1770 participants, all undertaken in high‐income countries. Ten were RCTs and three were cluster RCTs. The mean age of study participants ranged from 20 to 41 years. A majority of participants were female. All interventions were delivered at the individual level. Intervention components included personal monitoring devices, information or education, counselling, and prompts to reduce sedentary behaviour. We judged no study to be at low risk of bias across all domains. Seven studies were at high risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment due to use of self‐report outcomes measures. Primary outcomes Interventions outside the workplace probably show little or no difference in device‐measured sedentary time in the short term (mean difference (MD) ‐8.36 min/d, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐27.12 to 10.40; 4 studies; I² = 0%; moderate‐certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions reduce device‐measured sedentary time in the medium term (MD ‐51.37 min/d, 95% CI ‐126.34 to 23.59; 3 studies; I² = 84%; very low‐certainty evidence) We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace reduce self‐report sitting time in the short term (MD ‐64.12 min/d, 95% CI ‐260.91 to 132.67; I² = 86%; very low‐certainty evidence). Interventions outside the workplace may show little or no difference in self‐report TV viewing time in the medium term (MD ‐12.45 min/d, 95% CI ‐50.40 to 25.49; 2 studies; I² = 86%; low‐certainty evidence) or in the long term (MD 0.30 min/d, 95% CI ‐0.63 to 1.23; 2 studies; I² = 0%; low‐certainty evidence). It was not possible to pool the five studies that reported breaks in sedentary time given the variation in definitions used. Secondary outcomes Interventions outside the workplace probably have little or no difference on body mass index in the medium term (MD ‐0.25 kg/m², 95% CI ‐0.48 to ‐0.01; 3 studies; I² = 0%; moderate‐certainty evidence). Interventions may have little or no difference in waist circumference in the medium term (MD ‐2.04 cm, 95% CI ‐9.06 to 4.98; 2 studies; I² = 65%; low‐certainty evidence). Interventions probably have little or no difference on glucose in the short term (MD ‐0.18 mmol/L, 95% CI ‐0.30 to ‐0.06; 2 studies; I² = 0%; moderate‐certainty evidence) and medium term (MD ‐0.08 mmol/L, 95% CI ‐0.21 to 0.05; 2 studies, I² = 0%; moderate‐certainty evidence) Interventions outside the workplace may have little or no difference in device‐measured MVPA in the short term (MD 1.99 min/d, 95% CI ‐4.27 to 8.25; 4 studies; I² = 23%; low‐certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions improve device‐measured MVPA in the medium term (MD 6.59 min/d, 95% CI ‐7.35 to 20.53; 3 studies; I² = 70%; very low‐certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace improve self‐reported light‐intensity PA in the short‐term (MD 156.32 min/d, 95% CI 34.34 to 278.31; 2 studies; I² = 79%; very low‐certainty evidence). Interventions may have little or no difference on step count in the short‐term (MD 226.90 steps/day, 95% CI ‐519.78 to 973.59; 3 studies; I² = 0%; low‐certainty evidence) No data on adverse events or symptoms were reported in the included studies. Authors' conclusions Interventions outside the workplace to reduce sedentary behaviour probably lead to little or no difference in device‐measured sedentary time in the short term, and we are uncertain if they reduce device‐measured sedentary time in the medium term. We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace reduce self‐reported sitting time in the short term. Interventions outside the workplace may result in little or no difference in self‐report TV viewing time in the medium or long term. The certainty of evidence is moderate to very low, mainly due to concerns about risk of bias, inconsistent findings, and imprecise results. Future studies should be of longer duration; should recruit participants from varying age, socioeconomic, or ethnic groups; and should gather quality of life, cost‐effectiveness, and adverse event data. We strongly recommend that standard methods of data preparation and analysis are adopted to allow comparison of the effects of interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour

Personal and Environmental Contributors to Sedentary Behavior of Older Adults in Independent and Assisted Living Facilities

Sedentary behavior is associated with negative health outcomes and unhealthy aging. Older adults are the most sedentary age group, and decreasing sitting time represents an intervention target for improving health. Determinants of sedentary behavior have been examined in older adults living in their own homes, yet less is known about sedentary behavior of older adults in residential care facilities. The purpose of this study was to explore factors contributing to sedentary behavior among residents of independent and assisted living facilities. We conducted eight focus groups with residents (n = 44) and semi-structured interviews with staff (n = 6) across four living facilities. Audio recordings were transcribed and analyzed using an iterative, inductive approach. Three salient themes were identified. Residents and staff both viewed sedentary behavior negatively unless it was in the context of social engagement. Additionally, fear of falling was discussed as a significant contributor to sedentary behavior. Finally, residents felt the community living environment contributed to their sedentary behavior while staff did not. Our findings provide valuable insight for designing targeted interventions for older adults in residential facilities and suggest thinking beyond the individual and considering environmental influences on sedentary behavior in the residential care setting

Accuracy of Objective Physical Activity Monitors in Measuring Steps in Older Adults

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate accuracy of research activity monitors in measuring steps in older adults with a range of walking abilities. Method: Participants completed an initial assessment of gait speed. The accuracy of each monitor to record 100 steps was assessed across two walking trials. Results: In all, 43 older adults (age 87 ± 5.7 years, 81.4% female) participated. Overall, the StepWatch had the highest accuracy (99.0% ± 1.5%), followed by the ActivPAL (93.7% ± 11.1%) and the Actigraph (51.4% ± 35.7%). The accuracy of the Actigraph and ActivPAL varied according to assistive device use, and the accuracy of all three monitors differed by gait speed category (all p < .05). StepWatch was highly accurate (⩾97.7) across all conditions. Discussion: The StepWatch and ActivPAL monitor were reasonably accurate in measuring steps in older adults who walk slowly and use an assistive device. The Actigraph significantly undercounted steps in those who walk slow or use an assistive device. Researchers should consider gait speed and the use of assistive devices when selecting an activity monitor

Design of Lung Transplant Go (LTGO): A randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a telerehabilitation behavioral exercise intervention to improve physical activity, physical function, and blood pressure control after lung transplantation

Background: Lung transplantation is an established treatment option for persons with advanced lung disease. After transplantation, lung function typically returns to near normal levels, however exercise capacity remains low due to chronic deconditioning, limited physical function, and inactive lifestyles which undermine the intended benefits of the highly selective, resource-intensive transplant procedure. Pulmonary rehabilitation is recommended to improve fitness and activity tolerance, however due to multiple barriers, lung transplant recipients either never participate, or fail to complete, pulmonary rehabilitation programs. Purpose: To describe the design of Lung Transplant Go (LTGO), a trial modified for the remote environment based on recommendations to preserve trial integrity during COVID. The aims are to evaluate a behavioral exercise intervention to improve physical function, physical activity, and blood pressure control in lung transplant recipients conducted safely and effectively using a telerehabilitation (telerehab) platform, and to explore the role of potential mediators and moderators of the relationship between LTGO and outcomes. Methods: Single-site, 2-group randomized controlled trial with lung transplant recipients randomized 1:1 to either the LTGO intervention (a 2-phased, supervised, telerehab behavioral exercise program), or to enhanced usual care (activity tracking and monthly newsletters). All study activities, including intervention delivery, recruitment, consenting, assessment, and data collection, will be performed remotely. Conclusion: If efficacious, this fully scalable and replicable telerehab intervention could be efficiently translated to reach large numbers of lung recipients to improve and sustain self-management of exercise habits by overcoming barriers to participation in existing, in-person pulmonary rehabilitation programs