4.1 Article

Exercise intervention and health checks for middle-aged men with elevated cardiovascular risk: A randomized controlled trial

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
卷 32, 期 4, 页码 156-162

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/02813432.2014.984967

关键词

Cardiovascular risk; exercise intervention; Finland; general practice; health check; metabolic syndrome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To study the effects of a health check by a nurse alone or combined with an exercise intervention in middle-aged men at increased cardiovascular risk. Design. A randomized controlled trial. Setting and intervention. Primary care in Kirk-konummi municipality with 36 000 inhabitants. A health check by a nurse alone or combined with an exercise intervention to controls with no intervention was compared. Subjects. A total of 168 men aged 35 to 45 years with at least two cardiovascular risk factors and physical activity (PA) frequency < 3 times a week. Main outcome measures. Metabolic syndrome (MetS) as defined by International Diabetes Federation/American Heart Association and self-reported PA frequency. Results. Overall, focusing on health increased physical activity frequency in middle-aged men. After one year, 19% had increased PA to < 3 times a week (95% CI 12 -26). All study groups increased PA to >= 3 times: 26% of men in the exercise intervention group, 15% of men in the health check group, and 16% of controls. The differences between the groups were not statistically significant. The intervention did not have any meaningful impact on MetS or other cardiovascular outcomes at one-year follow up. Conclusions. Physical activity increased in all study groups of middle-aged men in this health-promotion trial. The interventions had no effect on metabolic syndrome or other cardiovascular outcomes in the participants. The trial increased awareness and collaboration in physical activity promotion among municipal health care and exercise services.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据