RESUMO
Objective. To evaluate the feasibility of disease-specific, community-based supervised exercise programs (CSEPs) to improve biometric and functional outcomes among persons with a variety of chronic medical conditions. Design. Feasibility, cohort study. Subjects were recruited through community placed flyers and provider offices. Exercise programs consisted of aerobic and resistance training that adhered to American College of Sports Medicine guidelines. A Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to assess program outcomes. Setting. Ten, community-based, medical fitness centers. Subjects. A total of 382 total participants. The number of participants in each CSEP ranged from 38 to 119. Individuals were 18 years of age or older and treated for various chronic medical conditions. Results. Varied by cohort, but generally consisted of (a) favorable changes in body composition ( P < .05), (b) significant improvements in submaximal exercise tolerance and functional outcome measures ( P < .05), and (3) significant increase in self-reported exercise behaviors ( P < .05). Conclusion. CSEPs improve outcomes in patients with chronic medical conditions and may be relevant within the continuum of care in outpatient rehabilitation medicine, particularly among bundled or value-based payment models. Further research is needed to evaluate outcomes from CSEPs versus controls.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: Worksite health promotion programs use health risk appraisal (HRA) surveys to identify employees at increased risk, then provide a range of interventions to encourage high-risk individuals to improve their health. Our objective was to determine how the intensity of intervention after HRA affected cardiovascular risk after 1 year, comparing individual follow-up counseling with environmental supports. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: 133 employees of Vanderbilt University with cardiovascular risk factors were randomly assigned to worksite HRA plus targeted disease management (DM group) or HRA plus information about worksite health promotion programs (HRA group). The DM group received longitudinal individualized counseling for risk reduction, whereas the HRA group members received one feedback session about their risk factors and information about free worksite health promotion programs. The main outcome measure was the difference between groups in the change in average Framingham risk score from baseline to 1 year. RESULTS: There was no significant baseline difference between groups in the Framingham risk score. Among DM participants, the mean (SD) Framingham risk score decreased by 22.6%; among HRA participants, the mean score rose by 4.3% (P = .017 for the difference between groups). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of employees with cardiovascular risk factors, HRA followed by individual counseling was more effective than providing information about free worksite health promotion programs.