Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Erin A. Olson x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Amanda J. Visek, Erin A. Olson and Loretta DiPietro

Background:

Little is known about factors affecting adherence to highly-structured and supervised exercise programs in older people.

Methods:

Healthy, inactive older (≥65 y) women (N = 30) were randomized into a 1) higher- (ATH—80% VO2peak); 2) moderate- (ATM—65% VO2peak) intensity aerobic; or 3) lower-intensity resistance (RTL; 50% VO2peak) group. All 3 groups exercised 4 days·week-1 for an average of 45 to 70 min·session-1 over 9 months. Adherence (%) was defined as the proportion of prescribed sessions (N = 144) in which subjects achieved their 1) prescribed heart rate (intensity adherence) and 2) their prescribed duration (duration adherence). Primary determinants of adherence included prescribed intensity (METs) and prescribed duration (min), as well as age, body composition, VO2peak, and exercise self-efficacy score.

Results:

Intensity adherence was nearly 100% for all 3 groups, while duration adherence was 95%, 91%, and 85% in the RTL, ATH, and ATM groups, respectively. Prescribed exercise duration was the strongest determinant of duration adherence (r = −0.72; P < .0001), independent of prescribed METs, age, VO2peak, and body composition.

Conclusions:

Due to competing lifestyle demands, exercise intensity may be less of a factor in adherence among older women than is exercise duration.

Restricted access

Emily L. Mailey, Neha P. Gothe, Thomas R. Wójcicki, Amanda N. Szabo, Erin A. Olson, Sean P. Mullen, Jason T. Fanning, Robert W. Motl and Edward McAuley

The criteria one uses to reduce accelerometer data can profoundly influence the interpretation of research outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of 3 different interruption periods (i.e., 20, 30, and 60 min) on the amount of data retained for analyses and estimates of sedentary time among older adults. Older adults (N = 311, M age = 71.1) wore an accelerometer for 7 d and reported wear time on an accelerometer log. Accelerometer data were downloaded and scored using 20-, 30-, and 60-min interruption periods. Estimates of wear time, derived using each interruption period, were compared with self-reported wear time, and descriptive statistics were used to compare estimates of sedentary time. Results showed a longer interruption period (i.e., 60 min) yields the largest sample size and the closest approximation of self-reported wear time. A short interruption period (i.e., 20 min) is likely to underestimate sedentary time among older adults.