Digitally supported dietary counselling may be helpful in increasing the protein intake in combined exercise and nutritional interventions in community-dwelling older adults. To study the effect of this approach, 212 older adults (72.2 ± 6.3 years) were randomised in three groups: control, exercise, or exercise plus dietary counselling. The dietary counselling during the 6-month intervention was a blended approach of face-to-face contacts and videoconferencing, and it was discontinued for a 6-month follow-up. Dietary protein intake, sources, product groups, resulting amino acid intake, and intake per eating occasion were assessed by a 3-day dietary record. The dietary counselling group was able to increase the protein intake by 32% at 6 months, and the intake remained 16% increased at 12 months. Protein intake mainly consisted of animal protein sources: dairy products, followed by fish and meat. This resulted in significantly more intake of essential amino acids, including leucine. The protein intake was distributed evenly over the day, resulting in more meals that reached the protein and leucine targets. Digitally supported dietary counselling was effective in increasing protein intake both per meal and per day in a lifestyle intervention in community-dwelling older adults. This was predominantly achieved by consuming more animal protein sources, particularly dairy products, and especially during breakfast and lunch.
MULTIFILE
Background: We developed an Internet-based physical activity (PA) support program (IPAS), which is embedded in a patient portal. We evaluated the effectiveness and costs of IPAS alone (online only) or IPAS combined with physiotherapist telephone counselling (blended care), compared to a control group. Methods: Breast or prostate cancer survivors, 3–36 months after completing primary treatment, were randomized to 6-months access to online only, blended care, or a control group. At baseline and 6-month post-baseline, minutes of moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were measured by accelerometers. Secondary outcomes were self-reported PA, fatigue, mood, health-related quality of life, attitude toward PA, and costs. (Generalized) linear models were used to compare the outcomes between groups. Results: We recruited 137 survivors (participation rate 11%). We did not observe any significant between-group differences in MVPA or secondary outcomes. Adherence was rather low and satisfaction scores were low to moderate, with better scores for blended care. Costs for both interventions were low. Conclusions: Recruitment to the study was challenging and the interventions were less efficacious than anticipated, which led to lessons learned for future trials. Suggestions for future research are as follows: improved accessibility of the support program, increased frequency of support, and use of activity trackers.
DOCUMENT
