Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: A four-group randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of distinct workplace interventions to increase the physical activity (PA) and to reduce anthropometric parameters in middle-age women. METHODS: One-hundred and ninety-five women age 40-50 yr who were employees from a university hospital and physically inactive at their leisure time were randomly assigned to one of four groups: minimal treatment comparator (MTC; n = 47), pedometer-based individual counseling (PedIC; n = 53), pedometer-based group counseling (PedGC; n = 48), and aerobic training (AT; n = 47). The outcomes were total number of steps (primary outcome), those performed at moderate intensity (≥ 110 steps per minute), and weight and waist circumference (secondary outcomes). Evaluations were performed at baseline, at the end of a 3-month intervention, and 3 months after that. Data were presented as delta [(after 3 months-baseline) or (after 6 months-baseline)] and 95% confidence interval. To detect the differences among the groups, a one-way ANOVA and a Holm-Sidak post hoc test was used (P < 0.05). The Cohen effect size was calculated, and an intention-to-treat approach was performed. RESULTS: Only groups using pedometers (PedIC and PedGC) increased the total number of steps after 3 months (P < 0.05); however, the increase observed in PedGC group (1475 steps per day) was even higher than that in PedIC (512 steps per day, P < 0.05) with larger effect size (1.4). The number of steps performed at moderate intensity also increased only in the PedGC group (845 steps per day, P < 0.05). No PA benefit was observed at 6 months. Women submitted to AT did not modify PA daily life activity but reduced anthropometric parameters after 3 and 6 months (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that in the workplace setting, pedometer-based PA intervention with counseling is effective increasing daily life number of steps, whereas AT is effective for weight loss.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ribeiro et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: