Group-Based and Individually Delivered LiFE: Content Evaluation and Predictors of Training Response - A Dose-Response Analysis.

Franziska Kramer-Gmeiner, Sarah Labudek, Corinna Nerz, Carl-Philipp Jansen, Jochen Klenk, Clemens Becker, Michael Schwenk

Journal: Clinical interventions in aging 2022;17():637-652

PMID: 35509348

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Lifestyle-integrated Functional Exercise (LiFE) is an effective, individually delivered fall prevention program but comes with substantial resource requirements; hence, a group-format was developed (gLiFE). This study 1) evaluates the program content of two different LiFE formats (group vs individual) and 2) examines the relationship between predictors of training response (dose) and improvements in balance, strength, and physical activity (PA) (response).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The analysis included n = 252 (gLiFE = 126, LiFE = 126) community-dwelling older adults (78.6±5.2 years). LiFE was administered in seven sessions either in a group (gLiFE: 8-12 participants) or individually at home (LiFE). Questionnaire-based, descriptive content evaluation (frequency distributions) included reported frequency of practice (days/week, number of activities), activity preferences, safety, intensity, integrability of activities, and acceptance after 6 months of LiFE practice. Predictors (ie, dose [reported frequency and intensity], safety, and integrability of activities) for improvements in balance, strength, and PA were analyzed using radar charts.

RESULTS

In both formats, 11.2 activities were practiced on average. Strength activities were more frequently selected than balance. Content evaluation showed some marginal advantages for the LiFE participants for selected aspects. The effects on balance, strength, and PA were nearly similar in both groups. Participants who performed balance activities more frequently (≥4 days/week) scored better in the balance and PA domain. Those who performed strength activities more frequently (≥4 days/week) performed better in all three outcomes. Higher perceived safety was associated with better performance. Those who reported activities as "not physically exhausting" performed better in all three outcomes. Those who found activities easily integrable into daily routines scored higher in the balance and strength domain.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Overall, both program formats are comparable with respect to content evaluation and effects. Participants need to perceive the activities as safe, not exhausting, and should practice ≥4 days/week to generate a high benefit from the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03462654. Registered on 12 March 2018.

© 2022 Nerz et al.

Address: Department for Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.; Network Aging Research (NAR), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.; Institute of Sports and Sports Sciences, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.; Institute of Epidemiology and Medical Biometry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.; IB University of Health and Social Sciences, Study Centre Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.; Unit Digitale Geriatrie, Medical Faculty of the University Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.; Human Performance Research Centre, Department of Sport Science, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.