Cognitive and physical activity are important for daily functioning. However, limited research exists on the motivators and barriers associated with older adults participating and adhering to exergame studies that promote physical and cognitive activity. Our objective was to examine older adults' motivators and barriers to joining and completing a three-dimensional exergame study.
Methods:
Fourteen older adults who participated in the exergame study contributed to one of three focus group discussions. Inductive and deductive methods were used to analyze the qualitative data.
Results:
Motivators for joining were generativity, peer referrals, self-improvement, and curiosity. Accomplishment, immersion, and exercise were motivators for retention. Participants also cited the structured schedule and adaptive difficulty features as motivators for retention. Barriers to participation included frustration due to lack of level advancement and fatigue/pain during gameplay. Some (n = 3) reported camera tracking issues as a barrier. Unanticipated gender-based trends arose when examining perceptions of the study team's role and motivators for retention.
Conclusion:
These findings will inform future research strategies for participant recruitment, enrollment, and retention, in addition to providing insights into the design of motivating, enjoyable, and sustainable exergames for older adults.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KimY, LeeE. The association between elderly people's sedentary behaviors and their health-related quality of life: Focusing on comparing the young-old and the old-old. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 2019; 17(1):131; doi: 10.1186/s12955-019-1191-0
2.
World Health Organization. Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2010.
3.
LanghammerB, BerglandA, RydwikE. The importance of physical activity exercise among older people. Biomed Res Int, 2018; 2018:7856823; doi: 10.1155/2018/7856823
4.
KingAC.Interventions to promote physical activity by older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2001; 56 Spec No 2:36–46; doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.suppl_2.36
5.
HarveyJA, ChastinSF, SkeltonDA. Prevalence of sedentary behavior in older adults: A systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2013; 10(12):6645–6661; doi: 10.3390/ijerph10126645
6.
ThivelD, TremblayA, GeninPM, et al.Physical activity, inactivity, and sedentary behaviors: Definitions and implications in occupational health. Front Public Health, 2018; 6:288; doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00288
7.
Rivera-TorresS, FaheyTD, RiveraMA. Adherence to exercise programs in older adults: Informative report. Gerontol Geriatr Med, 2019; 5:2333721418823604; doi: 10.1177/2333721418823604
8.
PicorelliAM, PereiraLS, PereiraDS, et al.Adherence to exercise programs for older people is influenced by program characteristics and personal factors: A systematic review. J Physiother, 2014; 60(3):151–156; doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2014.06.012
9.
MarioniRE, ValenzuelaMJ, Van den HoutA, et al.Active cognitive lifestyle is associated with positive cognitive health transitions and compression of morbidity from age sixty-five. PLoS One, 2012; 7(12):e50940; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050940
10.
LampitA, HallockH, ValenzuelaM. Computerized cognitive training in cognitively healthy older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of effect modifiers. PLoS Med, 2014; 11(11):e1001756; doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001756
11.
CarlsonMC, ParisiJM, XiaJ, et al.Lifestyle activities and memory: Variety may be the spice of life. The women's health and aging study II. J Int Neuropsychol Soc, 2012; 18(2):286–294; doi: 10.1017/s135561771100169x
12.
HessTM, EnnisGE. Age differences in the effort and costs associated with cognitive activity. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci, 2012; 67(4):447–455; doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbr129
13.
KueiderAM, ParisiJM, GrossAL, et al.Computerized cognitive training with older adults: A systematic review. PLoS One, 2012; 7(7):e40588; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040588
14.
TurunenM, HokkanenL, BäckmanL, et al.Computer-based cognitive training for older adults: Determinants of adherence. PLoS One, 2019; 14(7):e0219541; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219541
15.
BallK, BerchDB, HelmersKF, et al.Effects of cognitive training interventions with older adults: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 2002; 288(18):2271–2281; doi: 10.1001/jama.288.18.2271
16.
ColeyN, NganduT, LehtisaloJ, et al.Adherence to multidomain interventions for dementia prevention: Data from the FINGER and MAPT trials. Alzheimers Dement, 2019; 15(6):729–741; doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.03.005
17.
RyanRM, DeciEL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol, 2000; 55(1):68; doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
18.
RyanRM, DeciEL. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. New York, NY: Guilford Publications; 2017.
19.
DeciEL, RyanRM. Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In: The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation. (Ryan RM. ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2012.
20.
DeciEL, RyanRM. Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In: Kernis MH. (ed.) Efficacy, Agency, and Self-Esteem. Boston, MA: Springer; 1995; pp. 31–49.
21.
PatrickH, WilliamsGC. Self-determination theory: Its application to health behavior and complementarity with motivational interviewing. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act, 2012; 9:18; doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-18
22.
DeciEL, RyanRM. A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In: Dienstbier RA. (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1990: Perspectives on Motivation. Current Theory and Research in Motivation, Vol. 38. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press; 1991; pp. 237–288.
23.
RyanRM, RigbyCS, PrzybylskiA. The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motiv Emot, 2006; 30(4):344–360; doi: 10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8
Anderson-HanleyC, ArcieroPJ, BrickmanAM, et al.Exergaming and older adult cognition: A cluster randomized clinical trial. Am J Prev Med, 2012; 42(2):109–119; doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.016
26.
AzizanA, JustineM, KuanCS. Effects of a behavioral program on exercise adherence and exercise self-efficacy in community-dwelling older persons. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res, 2013; 2013:282315; doi: 10.1155/2013/282315
27.
SkjæretN, NawazA, MoratT, et al.Exercise and rehabilitation delivered through exergames in older adults: An integrative review of technologies, safety and efficacy. Int J Med Inform, 2016; 85(1):1–16; doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.10.008
28.
AlhasanH, HoodV, MainwaringF. The effect of visual biofeedback on balance in elderly population: A systematic review. Clin Interv Aging, 2017; 12:487; doi: 10.2147/CIA.S127023
29.
NeriSG, CardosoJR, CruzL, et al.Do virtual reality games improve mobility skills and balance measurements in community-dwelling older adults? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil, 2017; 31(10):1292–1304; doi: 10.1177/0269215517694677
30.
KimH, SefcikJS, BradwayC. Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: A systematic review. Res Nurs Health, 2017; 40(1):23–42; doi: 10.1002/nur.21768
31.
SandelowskiM.Whatever happened to qualitative description?. Res Nurs Health, 2000; 23(4):334–340; doi: 10.1002/1098-240x(200008)23:4 <334::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-g
32.
RinggenbergN, MildnerS, HapigM, et al.ExerG: Adapting an exergame training solution to the needs of older adults using focus group and expert interviews. J Neuroeng Rehabil, 2022; 19(1):89; doi: 10.1186/s12984-022-01063-x
33.
KariT.Exergaming experiences of older adults: A critical incident study. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Bled eConference “Humanizing Technology for a Sustainable Society”, 2019; pp. 639–654; doi: 10.18690/978-961-286-280-0.34
34.
KariT, MakkonenM, MoilanenP, et al.The Habits of Playing and the Reasons for Not Playing Exergames: Age Differences in Finland. IADIS IJWI (International Journal on WWW/Internet), 2013; 11:30–42.
35.
MeekesW, StanmoreEK. Motivational determinants of exergame participation for older people in assisted living facilities: Mixed-methods study. J Med Internet Res, 2017; 19(7):e238; doi: 10.2196/jmir.6841
36.
FreedSA, SpragueBN, StephanAT, et al.Feasibility and enjoyment of exercise video games in older adults. Front Public Health, 2021; 9:751289; doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.751289
37.
MeekesWMA, FordC, StanmoreEK. Recruitment and retention of older adults in Assisted Living Facilities to a clinical trial using technology for falls prevention: A qualitative case study of barriers and facilitators. Health Soc Care Community, 2021; 29(5):1296–1307; doi: 10.1111/hsc.13170
38.
Barg-WalkowLH, HarringtonCN, MitznerTL, et al.Understanding older adults' perceptions of and attitudes towards exergames. Gerontechnology, 2017; 16(2):81–90; doi: 10.4017/gt.2017.16.2.003.00
39.
HarringtonCN, HartleyJQ, MitznerTL, et al.Assessing older adults' usability challenges using kinect-based Exergames. Hum Asp IT Aged Popul, 2015; 9194:488–499; doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-20913-5_45
40.
NguyenAV, OngYA, LuoCX, et al.Virtual reality exergaming as adjunctive therapy in a sub-acute stroke rehabilitation setting: Facilitators and barriers. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 2019; 14(4):317–324; doi: 10.1080/17483107.2018.1447608
41.
RogersC, ShamleyD, AmosunS. Older adults' experience of an exergaming intervention to improve balance and prevent falls: A nested explanatory qualitative study. Appl Sci, 2021; 11(24):11678.
42.
RigattiM, DeGurianAA, AlbertSM. “Getting There”: Transportation as a barrier to research participation among older adults. J Appl Gerontol, 2022; 41(5):1321–1328; doi: 10.1177/07334648211072537
43.
KrakauerJW, KitagoT, GoldsmithJ, et al.Comparing a novel neuroanimation experience to conventional therapy for high-dose intensive upper-limb training in subacute stroke: The SMARTS2 randomized trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2021; 35(5):393–405; doi: 10.1177/15459683211000730
44.
KrakauerJW, CortésJC. A non-task-oriented approach based on high-dose playful movement exploration for rehabilitation of the upper limb early after stroke: A proposal. NeuroRehabilitation, 2018; 43(1):31–40; doi: 10.3233/NRE-172411
45.
CorfmanKP. The importance of member homogeneity to focus group quality. In: ACR North American Advances. Vol. 22. (Kardes F, Sujan M, eds.) Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research; 1995; pp. 354–359.
46.
MaiettaR, MihasP, SwartoutK, et al.Sort and sift, think and shift: Let the data be your guide an applied approach to working with, learning from, and privileging qualitative data. Qual Rep, 2021; 26(6):2045–2060; doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2021.5013
47.
MerriamSB, TisdellEJ. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. Somerset, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2015.
BecchettiL, BellucciD. Generativity, aging and subjective well-being. Int Rev Econ, 2021; 68(2):141–184; doi: 10.1007/s12232-020-00358-6
50.
EriksonEH.Childhood and Society. 2nd ed. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company; 1993.
51.
FriedLP, CarlsonMC, FreedmanM, et al.A social model for health promotion for an aging population: Initial evidence on the Experience Corps model. J Urban Health, 2004; 81(1):64–78; doi: 10.1093/jurban/jth094
52.
ParisiJM, KuoJ, RebokGW, et al.Increases in Lifestyle Activities as a Result of Experience Corps® Participation. J Urban Health, 2015; 92(1):55–66; doi: 10.1007/s11524-014-9918-z
53.
GruenewaldTL, TannerEK, FriedLP, et al.The Baltimore Experience Corps Trial: Enhancing generativity via intergenerational activity engagement in later life. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci, 2016; 71(4):661–670; doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbv005
54.
CarlsonMC, KuoJH, ChuangY-F, et al.Impact of the Baltimore Experience Corps Trial on cortical and hippocampal volumes. Alzheimers Dement, 2015; 11(11):1340–1348; doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.12.005
55.
CarlsonMC, EricksonKI, KramerAF, et al.Evidence for neurocognitive plasticity in at-risk older adults: The experience corps program. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2009; 64(12):1275–1282; doi: 10.1093/gerona/glp117
56.
WigglesworthJC, YoungBW, MedicN, et al.Examining gender differences in the determinants of Masters Swimmers' sport commitment. Int J Sport Exerc Psychol, 2012; 10(3):236–250; doi: 10.1080/1612197X.2012.691232
57.
van UffelenJGZ, KhanA, BurtonNW. Gender differences in physical activity motivators and context preferences: A population-based study in people in their sixties. BMC Public Health, 2017; 17(1):624; doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4540-0
58.
SenguptaM, Harris-KojetinLD, CaffreyC. Variation in Residential Care Community Resident Characteristics, by Size of Community: United States 2014. Hyattsville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2015.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
