背景:本研究试图确定一个专注于提高日常生活识字能力的项目是否能有效预防身体虚弱,并比较身体虚弱的标准治疗方法。方法:本研究设计为试点干预研究,涉及两组。A区25名年龄在65至85岁之间的老年人,东京,按地区随机分配到扫盲组或锻炼组,每月两次接受60至90分钟的课程,四个月八次.扫盲小组主要利用影像资料来监督学习,运动组使用了多因素运动计划。结果:LSI-Z,GAS-L,最长5米步行时间,和TUG测试显示两组干预前后的主要作用(p<0.05,p<0.01)。WHOQOL26,最大步行时间5m,和TUG测试也显示了两组的主要影响(p<0.05)。结论:这两个方案,当独立实施时,对主观幸福感有特定影响,职业表现,和身体健康。然而,运动组的QOL和身体素质明显高于识字组。由于本试验研究的样本量有限,因此应谨慎考虑这些结果。
Background: This
study attempts to determine whether a program focused on improving literacy in daily living is effective in preventing physical frailty, and to compare standard treatments for physical frailty. Methods: This
study was designed as a pilot intervention
study involving two groups. Twenty-five older adults aged 65 to 85 in Ward A, Tokyo, were randomly assigned to the literacy group or the exercise group on a regional basis and were given a 60- to 90-minute program twice a month, eight times over four months. The literacy group mainly used video materials to monitor learning, and the exercise group used a multifactor exercise program. Results: The LSI-Z, GAS-L, Maximum 5 m walking time, and TUG tests showed the main effects before and after the intervention in both groups (p < 0.05, p < 0.01). The WHOQOL26, Maximum 5 m walking time, and TUG tests also showed the main effects across both groups (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Both programs, when implemented independently, showed specific effects on subjective well-being, occupational performance, and physical fitness. However, QOL and physical fitness were significantly higher in the exercise group than in the literacy group. These results should be considered with caution because of the limited sample size of this pilot
study.