Offering physical activities matching with the preferences of residents in long-term care facilities could increase compliance and contribute to client-centered care. A measure to investigate meaningful activities by using a photo-interview has been developed (“MIBBO”). In two pilot studies including 133 residents living on different wards in long-term care facilities, feasibility, most chosen activities, and consistency of preferences were investigated. It was possible to conduct the MIBBO on average in 30 min with the majority (86.4%) of residents. The most frequently chosen activities were: gymnastics and orchestra (each 28%), preparing a meal (31%), walking (outside, 33%), watering plants (38%), and feeding pets (40%). In a retest one week after the initial interview 69.4% agreement of chosen activities was seen. The MIBBO seems a promising measure to help health care professionals in identifying residents’ preferred activities. Future research should focus on the implementation of the tailored activity plan, incorporating it into the daily routine.
DOCUMENT
Background: The objective of this study was to derive evidence-based physical activity guidelines for the general Dutch population. Methods: Two systematic reviews were conducted of English language meta-analyses in PubMed summarizing separately randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies on the relation between physical activity and sedentary behaviour on the one hand and the risk of all-cause mortality and incidence of 15 major chronic diseases and conditions on the other hand. Other outcome measures were risk factors for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, physical functioning, and fitness. On the basis of these reviews, an expert committee derived physical activity guidelines. In deriving the guidelines, the committee first selected only experimental and observational prospective findings with a strong level of evidence and then integrated both lines of evidence. Results: The evidence found for beneficial effects on a large number of the outcome measures was sufficiently strong to draw up guidelines to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour, respectively. At the same time, the current evidence did not provide a sufficient basis for quantifying how much physical activity is minimally needed to achieve beneficial health effects, or at what amount sedentary behaviour becomes detrimental. A general tenet was that at every level of current activity, further increases in physical activity provide additional health benefits, with relatively larger effects among those who are currently not active or active only at light intensity. Three specific guidelines on (1) moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity, (2) bone- and musclestrengthening activities, and (3) sedentary behaviour were formulated separately for adults and children. Conclusions: There is an unabated need for evidence-based physical activity guidelines that can guide public health policies. Research in which physical activity is measured both objectively (quantity) and subjectively (type and quality) is needed to provide better estimates of the type and actual amount of physical activity required for health.
DOCUMENT
Introduction Physical activity levels of children with disabilities are low, as these children and their parents face a wide variety of both personal and environmental barriers. Behavior change techniques support pediatric physical therapists to address these barriers together with parents and children. We developed the What Moves You?! intervention Toolkit (WMY Toolkit) filled with behavioral change tools for use in pediatric physical therapy practice. Objective To evaluate the feasibility of using the WMY Toolkit in daily pediatric physical therapy practice. Methods We conducted a feasibility study with a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews with pediatric physical therapists (n = 11). After one day of training, the pediatric physical therapists used the WMY Toolkit for a period of 9 weeks, when facilitating physical activity in children with disabilities. We analyzed the transcripts using an inductive thematic analysis followed by a deductive analysis using a feasibility framework. Results For acceptability, pediatric physical therapists found that the toolkit facilitated conversation about physical activity in a creative and playful manner. The working mechanisms identified were in line with the intended working mechanisms during development of the WMY Toolkit, such as focusing on problem solving, self-efficacy and independence. For demand, the pediatric physical therapists mentioned that they were able to use the WMY Toolkit in children with and without disabilities with a broad range of physical activity goals. For implementation, education is important as pediatric physical therapists expressed the need to have sufficient knowledge and to feel confident using the toolkit. For practicality, pediatric physical therapists were positive about the ease of which tools could be adapted for individual children. Some of the design and materials of the toolkit needed attention due to fragility and hygiene. Conclusion The WMY Toolkit is a promising and innovative way to integrate behavior change techniques into pediatric physical therapy practice.
LINK
