PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8153498

Adherence to exercise programmes. Recommendations.

J I Robison·M A Rogers
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Despite the widespread dissemination of information concerning the negative health consequences associated with sedentary living, adult physical activity in many industrialised nations remains well below recommended levels. Approximately 50% of individuals who start an aerobic exercise programme will stop within the first 6 months, even though it is well known that to obtain the health benefits associated with physical activity, participation must be maintained. Programmes involving the use of behaviour management techniques appear to increase short term adherence to exercise. Recently, an adherence rate of greater than 95% over 6 months was achieved in a large group of university employees who participated in aerobic training using a 'behavioural treatment packages' approach. Unfortunately, inconsistencies in the literature on definitions and measurement of adherence make valid comparisons among studies difficult. Also, long term follow-up of behavioural intervention methods and their effect on exercise adherence is generally lacking. It is likely that strategies to increase physical activity participation in the general population will demand multiple levels of intervention (personal, organisational, environmental and societal) if they are to succeed in the long term.

Explore related subjects

Attitude to HealthBehavior TherapyExerciseHumansLife StylePatient ComplianceJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J I Robison, M A Rogers. 1994. Adherence to exercise programmes. Recommendations.. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-199417010-00004

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1996

Media coverage of the Child B case.

The case of a girl with leukaemia, known as Child B, hit the headlines in March 1995 when her father refused to accept the advice of doctors who counselled against further treatment and took Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Authority to court for refusing to fund chemotherapy and a second bone transplant for her in the private sector. British national newspapers varied greatly in the way they covered the case. Some paid little attention to clinical considerations and presented the case as an example of rationing based on financial considerations. Their selective presentations meant that anyone reading just one newspaper would have received only limited and partial information. If members of the public are to participate in debates about treatment decisions and health care rationing, means other than the media will need to be found to inform and involve them.

Attitude to Health↗
PubMed1996

The rationing agenda in the NHS. Rationing Agenda Group.

The Rationing Agenda Group has been founded to deepen the British debate on rationing health care. It believes that rationing in health care is inevitable and that the public must be involved in the debate about issues relating to rationing. The group comprises people from all parts of health care, none of whom represent either their group or their institutions. RAG has begun by producing this document, which attempts to set an agenda of all the issues that need to be considered when debating the rationing of health care. We hope for responses to the document. The next stage will be to incorporate the responses into the agenda. Then RAG will divide the agenda into manageable chunks and commission expert, detailed commentaries. From this material a final paper will be published and used to prompt public debate. This stage should be reached early in 1997. While these papers are being prepared RAG is developing ways to involve the public in the debate and evaluate the whole process. We present as neutrally as possible all the issues related to rationing and priority setting in the NHS. We focus on the NHS for two reasons. Firstly, for those of us resident in the United Kingdom the NHS is the health care system with which we are most familiar and most concerned. Secondly, focusing on one system alone allows more coherent analysis than would be possible if issues in other systems were included as well. Our concern is with the delivery of health care, not its finance, though we discuss the possible effects of changing the financing system of the NHS. Finally, though our position is neutral, we hold two substantive views--namely, that rationing is unavoidable and that there should be more explicit debate about the principles and issues concerned. We consider the issues under four headings: preliminaries, ethics, democracy, and empirical questions. Preliminaries deal with the semantics of rationing, whether rationing is necessary, and with the range of services to which rationing relates. Under ethics and democracy are the substantive issues of principle and theory. The final section deals with empirical questions and those relating to the practicality of various strategies.

Attitude to Health↗