BackgroundDespite the widely known benefits of exercise and physical activity, adherence rates to these activities are poor. Understanding exercise facilitators, barriers, and preferences may provide an opportunity to personalize exercise prescription and improve adherence. The purpose of this study was to develop the Personalized Exercise Questionnaire (PEQ) to identify these facilitators, barriers, and preferences to exercise in people with osteoporosis.MethodsThis study comprises two phases, instrument design and judgmental evidence. A panel of 42 experts was used to validate the instrument through quantitative (content validity) and qualitative (cognitive interviewing) methods. Content Validity Index (CVI) is the most commonly used method to calculate content validity quantitatively. There are two kinds of CVI: Item-CVI (I-CVI) and Scale-level CVI (S-CVI).ResultsPreliminary versions of this tool showed high content validity of individual items (I-CVI range: 0.50 to 1.00) and moderate to high overall content validity of the PEQ (S-CVI/UA = 0.63; S-CVI/Ave = 0.91). Through qualitative methods, items were improved until saturation was achieved. The tool consists of 6 domains and 38 questions. The 6 domains are: 1) support network; 2) access; 3) goals; 4) preferences; 5) feedback and tracking; and 6) barriers. There are 35 categorical questions and 3 open-ended items.ConclusionsUsing an iterative approach, the development and evaluation of the PEQ demonstrated high item-content validity for assessing the facilitators, barriers, and preferences to exercise in people with osteoporosis. Upon further validation it is expected that this measure might be used to develop more client-centered exercise programs, and potentially improve adherence.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-017-1914-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

There were several high-quality CPGs; however, variability in quality and lack of specific parameters for implementation necessitates caution and critical examination by readers. CPG development groups should pay special attention to the clinical applicability of their CPGs as well as fully disclosing conflicts of interest. CPGs were in general an agreement regarding safe physical activity and safe movement recommendations. However, recommendations were often vague and the more specific recommendations were inconsistent between CPGs.

Most RCTs found were of fair quality; however, less than three quarters identified facilitators and barriers to exercise. Reporting of methods to promote and measure exercise adherence were low. Future work should be directed toward identifying major facilitators and barriers to exercise adherence within RCTs. Only then can methods be identified to leverage facilitators and overcome barriers, thus strengthening the evidence for efficacy of optimal interventional exercise programs. This review has been registered in PROSPERO under registration number CRD42016039941.

A multicomponent exercise program of high-speed training combined with simulated functional tasks is promising to enhance functional outcomes. Due to substantial clinical heterogeneity of the target groups and specific demands of exercise modes, it is unclear which exercise program is optimal.