Cycling performance is influenced by refining either the human performance or via innovations in equipment. The aerobar is an extension attached to handlebars that places the cyclist in a lowered position. Although research has shown that aerobars reduce wind resistance during cycling, there is conflicting evidence as to the physiological response to adopting the aero position. PURPOSE To compare cardiovascular and ventilatory parameters in upright (U) versus aero (A) cycle ergometry at submaximal and maximal exercise intensities in untrained cyclists. METHODS Ten physically active males (mean age 19.1±1.10 years) who were unfamiliar with aerobars underwent maximal exercise testing and steady state cycling at 50, 100 and 150 watts. RESULTS In the upright position, participants had significantly greater maxima (mean (95%CI):upright;aero) for VO2, [52.85ml·kg-1·min-1 (49.19–56.49); 50.25ml·kg-1·min-1 (47.22–53.27)], ventilation, [130.11 (1-min-1) (119.77–140.45); 116.64(1-min-1) (107.24–126.04)], heart rate [195bpm (192–199); 191bpm (188–194)], and workload max [280watts (262–298); 265watts (246–284)] in the upright position. During steady state cycling at the three workloads, VO2(ml·kg-1·min-1) and gross mechanical efficiency were enhanced in the upright position. CONCLUSION In untrained subjects undertaking maximal effort, the upright position permits greater VO2, ventilation, heart rate and workload maxima. Further, during steady state exercise cycling may be less costly in the upright position. For this reason, untrained cyclists need to weigh body position effects against the well-known aerodynamic advantages of the aero position.
Background The Safer Bars programme, developed in Canada in the late 1990's, resulted in a 30% reduction in violent incidences in bars where it was trialled in Canada. The Injury Control Council of WA (ICCWA) ran a successful pilot with venues in the entertainment precinct in the City of Vincent. Aim To work with licensed venues to implement changes to reduce the incidence of violence, aggression and injury by improving staff skills in communication within their staff groups and between staff and patrons. Method The methodology of the programme was primarily centred around a delivered training package and observational audits at 3, 6 and 12 month intervals. Police offence data was also recorded early in the project to identify a baseline and then again intervals post initial training. Outcome The programme yielded positive results, recorded very high satisfaction rates and positive learning outcomes by participants. In particular, the module ‘Responding to Problem Situations’ was the highest rated training module with 93% of participants saying that they found it useful or extremely useful. This is very encouraging for the programme as this is one of the central aspects of Safer Bars. Significance Safer Bars is an effective measure to reduce alcohol related crime and violence in and around licensed venues.
Time in sedentary behaviours is being recognised as an independent contributor to adverse health outcomes. Seasonal variation in physical activity patterns has been previously described; such variation has not been evaluated for the amount of time spent in sedentary behaviours. PURPOSE: Our primary objective was to determine the difference in sedentary time assessed by accelerometry in community-dwelling post-menopausal women aged 65-75 years of age. Specifically we examined total sedentary time and breaks in sedentary time between summer and winter in older women. METHODS: This was an a priori secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial to test the effect of frequency of resistance training (primary outcome was cognitive function). Participants were asked to wear accelerometers (ActiGraph GT1M, Pensacola, FL) during waking hours (except during study exercise classes and water-based activities) for 1 week (data collected in 1 min epoch with at least 4 days with 10+ hrs/day) at 2 time points: summer (July) and winter (January). We classified sedentary time as counts less than 100 counts/min using MeterPlus software (Santech, La Jolla, CA). Breaks in sedentary time were defined as interruptions in sedentary time with counts above 100counts/min. We determined the total sedentary time, number of breaks in sedentary time and length of breaks in sedentary time. We adjusted for wear time variability between measurement periods by standardizing values based on residuals. We compared sedentary outcomes between summer and winter using a paired-T test. RESULTS: 107 participants had valid accelerometry data to meet the inclusion criteria. We pooled the data as there was no difference among the intervention groups for the sedentary outcomes. The mean age was 69.6±2.9 years, mean BMI was 26.6±5.6 kg/m2 and mean 6 minute walk test was 516±81 meters. For a mean wear time 5.8 days: the mean total sedentary time was 47.6 ±6.9 hrs in the summer and 50.8 ±5.8 hrs in the winter (p<0.001); the total number of breaks in sedentary time were 461±66 in summer and 440 ±71 in the winter (p=0.01); and the total length of breaks in sedentary time was 26.6±6.9 hrs in summer and 23.4±5.8 hrs in the winter (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this physically active group of community-dwelling older women we note a seasonal difference in sedentary time.
Abstract. Affective barriers like negative affect (time-varying subjective state) or fear of falling (person-trait) may reduce daily physical activity among older adults. A group of 123 community-dwelling older adults ( M age = 71.83, range = 64–85, 63% women) from Canada participated in a 10-day time-sampling study. We used accelerometer-assessed physical activity, assessing negative affect three times per day and fear of falling once prior to the 10-day period. Using multilevel models, we noted considerable variability in physical activity between days (activity counts: 47%; steps: 55%). We found time-varying negative associations between daily physical activity and daily negative affect. Fear of falling was not related to daily physical activity. Findings point to the merit of examining time-varying differences in subjective experiences when looking for physical activity barriers in older age.
Abstract Rumination involves repetitive, self-oriented, negative thinking and is known to be detrimental to psychological well-being and health. However, little is known about the extent to which rumination is associated with well-being and health in close relationship partners in older age. Additionally, the pandemic was a time that was characterized by high stress, making it an important context to study rumination. Using daily diary data from 140 Canadian older adults plus a close other of their choice (59% spouses, M = 66.72 years, SD = 13.01 range: 18-87 years, 88% White, 62% women), this project builds on past evidence examining daily life rumination dynamics and extends it to a dyadic perspective beyond couples. For ten days, both dyad members provided evening ratings of daily rumination and affect quality. Multilevel models replicate individual level evidence that higher daily rumination was associated with more daily negative affect and less daily positive affect. Importantly, we also found partner effects such that more close others’ rumination was associated with elevated actors’ negative affect (b = 0.03, p = .038) and reduced actors’ positive affect (b = -0.04, p = .023), suggesting that it is not only one’s own rumination that relates to daily well-being, but also that of a close tie. Findings demonstrate the utility of taking a dyadic perspective on what is typically conceived as an individual-level phenomenon.
Many interventions designed to meet physical activity guideline recommendations focus on a single component (e.g., walking), to the detriment of other elements of a healthy lifestyle, such as reducing prolonged sitting and doing balance and strength exercises (i.e., bundled multiple behaviors). Adopting these multiple health behaviors within daily life routines may facilitate uptake and support longer-term behavior change. We tested feasibility for a three-part lifestyle intervention to support older women to sit less, move more, and complete balance and strength exercises.We used a convergent parallel mixed-methods, single-arm study design to test feasibility for a 6-week lifestyle intervention: Return to Everyday Activities in the Community and Home (REACH). We collected information at baseline, 3 and 6 weeks (final), and 6 months (follow-up) using questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and performance-based measures. We describe three key elements: (1) implementation factors such as recruitment, retention, program delivery, and adherence; (2) participants' acceptability and experience with the program; and (3) health outcomes, including participants' global mobility, activity, and perceptions of their physical activity identity, and habit strength for (i) physical activity, (ii) breaking up sitting time, and (iii) balance and strength exercises.We were able to recruit enough participants in the allotted time to conduct one cycle of the REACH group-based program. There were 10 community-dwelling women, median (p25, p75) age 61 (57.5, 71) years, who completed the study. The program was feasible to deliver, with high attendance (mean 5/6 sessions) and positive overall ratings (8/10). Participants rated session content and length high, and educational materials as highly acceptable and understandable. Although participants were active walkers at baseline, few were breaking up prolonged sitting or participating in any balance and strength exercises. At final and follow-up assessments, participants reported developing habits for all three health behaviors, without diminishing physical activity.These results show acceptability of the program and its materials, and feasibility for bundling multiple health behaviors within the REACH program. It also provides confirmation to advance to testing feasibility of this three-part lifestyle intervention with older, less active, adults.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT02786394; May 18, 2016.
Walking is a common activity among older adults. However, the effects of walking on health-related outcomes in people with low bone mineral density (BMD) are unknown. The authors included randomized controlled trials comparing walking to control in individuals aged ≥50 years with low BMD and at risk of fractures. The authors identified 13 randomized controlled trials: nine multicomponent interventions including walking, one that was walking only, and three Nordic walking trials. Most studies had a high risk of bias. Nordic walking may improve the Timed Up-and-Go values (1.39 s, 95% CI [1.00, 1.78], very low certainty). Multicomponent interventions including walking improved the 6-min walk test (39.37 m, 95% CI [21.83, 56.91], very low certainty) and lumbar spine BMD (0.01 g/cm2, 95% CI [0.00, 0.03], low certainty evidence). The effects on quality of life or femoral neck BMD were not significant. There were insufficient data on fractures, falls, or mortality. Nordic walking may improve physical functioning. The effects on other outcomes are less certain; one may need to combine walking with other exercises to be of benefit.