Author
Listed:
- Kuei‐Min Chen
- Hsiu‐Hung Wang
- Chun‐Huw Li
- Ming‐Hsien Chen
Abstract
Aims. To evaluate and compare the appropriateness of the Silver Yoga exercise programme for community and institutional elders and to determine their preferences towards yoga exercises. Background. Yoga has been used to promote the health of elders. The Silver Yoga was developed to accommodate the physical tolerance and body flexibility of elders and applied to community and institutional elders with positive health promotion benefits. Design. Descriptive design with quantitative programme evaluation and semi‐structured interviews. Method. A convenience sample of 97 participants (64 community elders; 33 institutional elders) was interviewed individually after six months of Silver Yoga exercises. Participants rated the level of difficulty, acceptability, feasibility and helpfulness of the Silver Yoga programme (four phases: warm‐up, hatha yoga, relaxation and guided‐imagery meditation) and the abdominal breathing technique, based on a 10‐point Cantril ladder scale. Further, participants expressed their preferences of yoga exercises based on four open‐ended questions. Results. The programme was fairly acceptable, feasible and helpful for community and institutional elders (means ranged from 8·33–9·70). The warm‐up, relaxation, guided‐imagery meditation and abdominal breathing are fairly easy to follow and perform (means ranged from 0·20–0·94). However, the postures in hatha yoga phase were relatively challenging but still manageable for the institutional elders (mean = 1·97, SD 2·33). Further, community elders preferred to practise yoga 61–90 minutes everyday in a group of 11–20, while the institutional elders preferred to practise yoga 31–60 minutes three times per week, in a group of
Suggested Citation
Kuei‐Min Chen & Hsiu‐Hung Wang & Chun‐Huw Li & Ming‐Hsien Chen, 2011.
"Community vs. institutional elders’ evaluations of and preferences for yoga exercises,"
Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(7‐8), pages 1000-1007, April.
Handle:
RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:7-8:p:1000-1007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03337.x
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:7-8:p:1000-1007. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.