背景:超过一半(55%)的拉丁裔女性不符合有氧运动(PA)指南,经常引用时间,托儿服务,和交通作为PA的障碍。除了对这一人群的语言适应之外,对拉丁裔妇女的成功PA干预通过远程干预分娩方法解决了这些障碍(例如,邮件,电话,或网络交付)。
目的:我们旨在评估一项比较西班牙语语言的随机试验的6个月结局,个性化定制,网络交付的PA干预(原始)到增强版本,包括文本消息和附加功能(增强)。Further,我们评估了6个月时PA的升高是否受基线活动状态的影响.
方法:总共,195名年龄在18-65岁的拉丁裔妇女参加了一项试验,比较了增强干预措施与原始干预措施在启动PA行为改变方面的功效。我们检查了增强臂与原始臂中加速度计测量的PA的每周分钟数,以及每个手臂符合有氧PA指南的比例(6个月时150分钟/周)。对于主持人分析,参与者在基线时分为非活动(0min/wk)或低活动(1-90min/wk),通过7天体力活动召回访谈进行测量。
结果:在增强臂中,PA从基线时的每周19.7(SD47.9)分钟增加到6个月时的每周46.9(SD66.2)分钟,而在原始臂中,每周20.6(SD42.7)分钟增加到每周42.9(SD78.2)分钟(P=0.78)。总的来说,30%(31/103)的增强组在6个月时符合有氧PA指南,与原始组的21%(19/92)相比(比值比[OR]1.75,95%CI0.87-3.55)。基线PA(非活性与低活性)对PA的治疗效果有所缓和。对于不活跃的参与者,6个月时没有组间差异(b=7.1;SE22.8;P=0.75),而低活跃参与者的增强程度高于原始参与者(b=72.5;SE27.9;P=0.01)。对于低活跃的参与者,增强组的45%(46/103)在6个月时符合PA指南,与原始手臂的20%(18/92)相比(OR3.29,95%CI1.05-11.31)。对于不活跃的参与者,没有组差异(25/103,24%vsn=19/92,增强与原始的21%,分别为;OR1.28,95%CI0.54-3.06)。
结论:干预效果取决于基线PA。对于低活跃的拉丁女性来说,强化干预在增加PA方面更有效.额外的定制干预增强可能是必要的,以增加不活跃的拉丁裔妇女的PA。
背景:ClinicalTrials.govNCT03491592;https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/研究/NCT03491592。
■RR2-10.1186/s13063-022-06575-4。
BACKGROUND: More than half (55%) of Latina women do not meet aerobic physical activity (PA) guidelines, and frequently cite time, childcare, and transportation as barriers to PA. In addition to linguistic adaptations for this population, successful PA interventions for Latina women addressed these barriers through remote intervention delivery approaches (eg, mail, phone, or web delivery).
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate 6-month outcomes of a randomized trial comparing a Spanish-language, individually tailored, web-delivered PA intervention (original) to an enhanced version with text messages and additional features (enhanced). Further, we evaluated if increases in PA at 6 months were moderated by baseline activity status.
METHODS: In total, 195 Latina women aged 18-65 years participated in a trial comparing the efficacy of the enhanced versus original interventions at initiating PA behavior change. We examined minutes per week of accelerometer-measured PA in the enhanced versus original arms, and the proportion of each arm meeting aerobic PA guidelines (150 min/wk at 6 mo). For moderator analyses, participants were classified as inactive (0 min/wk) or low active (1-90 min/wk) at baseline, measured via the 7 Day Physical Activity Recall interview.
RESULTS: PA increased from 19.7 (SD 47.9) minutes per week at baseline to 46.9 (SD 66.2) minutes per week at 6 months in the enhanced arm versus 20.6 (SD 42.7) minutes per week to 42.9 (SD 78.2) minutes per week in the original arm (P=.78). Overall, 30% (31/103) of the enhanced group met aerobic PA guidelines at 6 months, compared to 21% (19/92) of the original group (odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% CI 0.87-3.55). Baseline PA (inactive vs low active) moderated treatment effects on PA. For inactive participants, there were no group differences at 6 months (b=7.1; SE 22.8; P=.75), while low-active participants increased more in enhanced than original (b=72.5; SE 27.9; P=.01). For low-active participants, 45% (46/103) of the enhanced group met PA guidelines at 6 months, versus 20% (18/92) of the original arm (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.05-11.31). For inactive participants, there were no group differences (25/103, 24% vs n=19/92, 21% for enhanced vs original, respectively; OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.54-3.06).
CONCLUSIONS: Intervention effects were conditional on baseline PA. For low-active Latina women, the enhanced intervention was more effective at increasing PA. Additional tailored intervention enhancements may be necessary to increase PA for inactive Latina women.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03491592; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03491592.
UNASSIGNED: RR2-10.1186/s13063-022-06575-4.