Table 2.
Effects of Lifestyle Interventions on Changes in Physical Function in Obese Older Adults
| Study | N | Age Range (years) | BMI Range (kg/m2) | Intervention | Contact Frequency | Length (weeks) | Physical Function Measure | Δ in Score | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anton et al. (2011) | 34 | 55–79 | >28.0 | CR+PA | wk | 24 | SPPB* | 1.8 | <.001 |
| Avila et al. (2010) | 31 | 60–75 | 25.0 – 39.9 | CR+RT | wk | 10 | SPPB | 0.1 | ns |
| Bouchard et al. (2009) | 48 | 55–75 | 27.0 – 38.0 | CR | wk | 12 | Global | 0.0 | ns |
| CR+RT | Physical | 2.0 | ns | ||||||
| RT | Capacity score* | 4.0 | <.05 | ||||||
| Jensen et al. (2004) | 26 | ≥60 | ≥30.0 | CR | wk | 12 | PPT | 1.1 | <.05 |
| Manini et al. (2010) | 424 | 70–88 | ≥30.0 | PA | wk | 52 | SPPB | 0.7 | <.05 |
| Nicklas et al. (2004)† | 112 | 50–70 | 25.0 – 40.0 | CR+PA | wk | 20 | SPPB | 0.4 | n/a |
| Santanasto et al. (2011) | 36 | ≥60 | 28.0 – 39.9 | CR+PA | wk | 52 | SPPB | 0.7 | <.05 |
| PA | 0.5 | ns | |||||||
| Straight et al. (2012) | 109 | 55–80 | 25.0 – 39.9 | CR + R | wk | 8 | SPPB | 0.5 | <.001 |
| Villareal et al. (2006) | 27 | ≥65 | ≥30.0 | CR+PA | wk | 26 | PPT** | 2.6 | <.001 |
| Villareal et al. (2011) | 107 | ≥65 | ≥30.0 | CR | wk | 52 | PPT* | 3.1 | <.001 |
| PA | 4.0 | <.001 | |||||||
| CR+PA | 5.4 | <.001 |
CR= Caloric Restriction; PA=Physical Activity; RT= Resistance Training; wk= weekly; PPT= Physical Performance Test; SPPB= Short Physical Performance Battery; Global Physical Capacity score= sum of 11 physical capacity tests; Δ= change
Change data are defined as the follow-up minus the baseline value.
*
Significant Between Group Difference p<.05;
**
Significant Between Group Difference p<.01
†
Data on physical function from Beavers et al (2012)