Page 121 - Physical activity in recipients of solid organ transplantation - Edwin J. van Adrichem

self-con

dence and exercise self-e
Physical activity in recipients of solid organ transplantation
to work likely re
perform more PA.
negative e
e
cts a certain health status that provides this group with the capacity to

ects, and exercise self-e
1,51

cacy.

high in this group as well.
e type of work was not classi
ed, however, it is likely that most
engage in work with excessive time in a sitting position and, therefore, sedentary time was

e factors associated with PA level and sedentary time that cannot be changed can
be employed to identify subgroups that require priority in intervention development, e.g.,
paying speci

c attention to younger transplant recipients to increase their PA level.
Associated factors of PA and sedentary time that can possibly be altered by intervention
are the barriers of physical limitations, low expectations and self-con

ese factors are likely to be positively in
erefore, it seems that rehabilitation could best be

dence, and fear of

uenced
through a rehabilitation program. As indicated in a recent expert meeting report and a
study on rehabilitation for recipients of SOT, su

cient knowledge is needed to adequately
target this speci

c population.
initiated or coordinated by an expert center.
1,51
Depending on the severity of issues, an
interdisciplinary team or specialized physical therapist could be deployed to initiate PA
following transplantation. By achieving a reduction in physical limitations and fear of
negative e

ects through training, education, and experience, recipients are likely to gain
Limitations

cacy. Speci
When interpreting the results of the current study, some limitations should be taken into
bicycle lanes and high walkability in neighborhoods could have positively in

c attention should be directed at skills for
coping with barriers.
account. First, the design of the study is cross-sectional and, therefore, only statistical
associations could be investigated, and no evidence on causal relationship could be
substantiated. Second, the focus was limited to the individual and interpersonal
determinants of PA and sedentary time and did not focus on environment, policy, and
global development.
due to this not being a barrier in this cohort.
Conclusion

e fact that a Dutch population is studied, who have access to ample

40
ird, the overall response rate of 46% was

uenced results
limited but is in line with average response rates in email and mail surveys.
52
It should be
noted that the sample of heart transplant recipients was limited. Fourth, subjective
measurements such as those used in the current study have measurement errors due to the
fact that response to questionnaires is in

uenced by perception, cultural factors, social
desirability, and the memory of respondents.
In conclusion, the percentage of recipients of a SOT who ful
barriers of physical limitations, and low expectations and self-con
attention to physical limitations, fear of negative e

ll the PA guideline is
alarmingly low. In intervention development directed at increasing the level of PA, the

dence should be taken
into account. Interventions directed at decreasing the level of sedentary time, should pay
ects, health and physical outcomes, and
119.
6