Self-monitored versus supervised walking programs for older adults

Abstract

Walking is an effective, well accepted, inexpensive, and functional intervention. This study compared the outcomes and changes in walking behavior of self-monitored (SM) and supervised (SU) walking interventions for older adults.Participants were assigned to SM (n = 21) and SU (n = 21) walking groups according to their place of residence. Both groups exercised and wore a pedometer for 3 months.The outcome measures were step count, body mass index (BMI), and physical function. Two-way repeated-measure ANOVA and independent t tests were used to compare the intervention effects. We also plotted the trends and analyzed the walking steps weekly.Only BMI exhibited a group × time interaction. The pre-posttest differences showed knee extension muscle strength (KEMS) and Timed Up and Go test were significantly improved in the SM group, whereas BMI, KEMS, 30-s sit-to-stand, functional reach were significantly improved, but 5-m gait speed significantly slower in the SU group. For participants attending ≥50% of the sessions, those in the SM and SU groups had similar results for all variables, except for 2-min step (2MS) and daily walking step counts.Both self-monitored and supervised walking benefit older adults in most physical functions, especially lower-extremity performance, such as muscle strength, balance, and mobility. The effects of both programs do not differ significantly, except for BMI and 2MS (ie cardiopulmonary endurance). We recommend pedometer-assisted self-monitored walking for older adults because of its ability to cultivate exercise habits over the long term, whereas supervised walking to establish effective exercise intensity.