Author(s): MUGGERIDGE, D., FRASER, M., GORELY, T., CRABTREE, C., Institution: EDINBURGH NAPIER UNIVERSITY, Country: UNITED KINGDOM, Abstract-ID: 263

INTRODUCTION:
Online exercise classes have been popularised in recent years due to the improvement in internet connectivity and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic restricting in-person exercise classes. Furthermore, the uptake of in-person exercise referral classes is poor and online exercise classes may offer an effective method of delivering exercise interventions in a cost-effective manner (e.g in remote and rural locations). Despite the potential, little is known about the intensity of exercise achieved between these two exercise delivery modes. Intensity is a key parameter for adaptation to exercise. Interestingly, research shows that older adults undertaking cardiac rehabilitation do not meet the prescribed intensity of 40-70% Heart Rate Reserve (HRR). The aim of this study was to assess the intensity that older adults achieved during online versus in-person exercise classes living in a rural location.
METHODS:
Eighteen, low-moderately active older adults (64.6 ± 6.5 years) completed four group exercise sessions delivered by the same exercise instructor (L4 Advanced Personal Trainer). Sessions combined aerobic and resistance exercises, following the same structure, and were completed at the same time of day, at least 5 days a part. Two of the exercise classes were completed online and two were completed in-person. Exercise intensity was monitored via a commercially available wearable device; Polar Verity Sense (Polar Electro OY, Kempele, Finland) and data was synced and shared via the Polar Beat app. HR data was categorised as either low or moderate and vigorous (MVPA) intensity based upon HRR training zones (< 40% HRR = Low Intensity [LOW], 40 – 69% = Moderate Intensity [MOD], >70% HRR = Vigorous intensity [VIG]) and percentage of session spent in each HR zone was compared between conditions.
RESULTS:
Adherence to the classes was 96.8% and compliance with the technology was 85.9%. Average HR during the sessions were lower during online vs in-person (online: 100 ± 15 b/min vs. in-person: 108 ± 17 b/min; p < 0.001). Time spent in LOW during the online class was significantly greater than the in-person class (online: 64.32 ± vs. in-person: 44.70 ± ; p < 0.001). Time spent in MVPA was significantly greater during in-person exercise and this was predominantly driven by an increased time spent in VIG activity but did not reach significance (online: 5.60 ± vs. in-person: 18.92 ± ; p = 0.113).
CONCLUSION:
Older adults achieve a higher intensity of exercise during in-person rather than online group exercise classes. This might have important implications when evaluating the health and economic impact of online exercise interventions as they may not be as effective as in-person classes due to decreased physiological stimulus. Nevertheless, adherence remains low amongst in-person exercise referral classes and therefore online exercise remains an exciting option for improving adherence, reach and choice amongst our diverse population.