PubMed · 14796332
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
1950. [Office exercises].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14796332/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: We describe the evaluation process and outcomes of Move & Improve, a worksite wellness program in Maine. The evaluation process was based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health and community-based participatory research principles. Innovative approaches are required to address burgeoning chronic disease trends and risk factors. Worksites are an ideal setting in which to affect working adults and high-risk individuals. Using community-based participatory research methodology increases community capacity for evaluation, dissemination, and use of evaluation results. CONTEXT: Move & Improve is an ongoing program that was implemented in 1996. Although evaluation data have been collected since the program's inception, a more systematic evaluation based on community-based participatory research principles was undertaken in 2003 and 2004 with the technical assistance of the Maine-Harvard Prevention Research Center and Colby College. METHODS: The Maine-Harvard Prevention Research Center facilitated the development of a program logic model, evaluation questions, data collection instruments, an analysis plan, presentations, and reports. We used a cross-sectional study design with nonparticipant comparison groups. CONSEQUENCES: Data indicate possible program improvement strategies and substantial improvements in lifestyle factors among participants. INTERPRETATION: Limitations of the evaluation include participant self-selection, cross-sectional study design, a lack of adequate resources for evaluation, and the challenges of using community-based participatory research methods. Despite these limitations, Move & Improve program staff consider the evaluation of the program a success and have learned ways to improve the program and future evaluation efforts. Overall satisfaction with the process has been nurtured through community-based participatory research methods. This approach also enabled us to meet key evaluation standards.
The non-pharmacological treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) comprises a large number of related components. Active case-finding is advocated in (ex-)smokers above the age of 40 who either cough or have 2 respiratory-tract infections per year. Structured self-management programmes may have positive effects; follow-up is of importance to prevent relapse of unhealthy behaviour. Patients with COPD must not smoke. Exercise training is essential in all stages of COPD; an exercise test should be done first, especially in severe COPD. Exercise training should preferably be incorporated in a pulmonary-rehabilitation programme if other components of such a programme are also indicated. Certain breathing exercises may be considered in patients that feel anxious or tense. Nutritional support combined with exercise training should be considered in patients with severe COPD and underweight, involuntary weight loss or a deficiency of fat-free mass. There are limited indications that psychosocial interventions may have a positive effect on the well-being and psychosocial function of patients with COPD. An exercise test to assess the maximum tolerated energy expenditure is indicated in COPD patients that experience limitations on their physical capabilities during work. Maintenance therapy with supplemental oxygen should be considered in case of hypoxia (PaO2 < 7.3 kPa) and if the PaO2 = 7.3-8.0 kPa combined with indications of pulmonary hypertension, peripheral oedema or a haematocrit > 0.55. A yearly influenza vaccination is indicated.
BACKGROUND: Despite major advances in pharmacological treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF), a number of patients still suffer from dyspnoea, fatigue, diminished exercise capacity and poor quality of life. It is in this context that exercise training is being intensively evaluated for any additional benefit in the treatment of CHF. AIMS: To determine the effect of exercise training in patients with CHF on cardiac performance, exercise capacity and health-related quality of life. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain this goal. METHODS AND RESULTS: After including 35 randomised controlled trials, the methodological quality of each study was assessed, summary effect sizes (SESs) and the concomitant 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for each outcome. Quantitative analysis showed statistically significant SESs, at rest, for diastolic blood pressure and end-diastolic volume. During maximal exercise, significant SESs were found for systolic blood pressure, heart rate, cardiac output, peak oxygen uptake, anaerobic threshold and 6-min walking test. The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire improved by an average of 9.7 points. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise training has clinically important effects on exercise capacity and HRQL, and may have small positive effects on cardiac performance during exercise.