*3.3. Physical Function and PA (Exploratory Results)*

Table 3 shows the exploratory results of the physical function and PA assessments for the intervention and control groups. The computed mean at baseline, the mean of the last follow-up, and the mean of the differences between baseline and follow-up with their associated standard deviations by intervention and control groups are presented in Table 3. Intention-to-treat analyses included imputing one measurement using the last measured changes available carried forward for only one participant. The overall analytical sample is n = 19. However, for the TUG and two-minute step test, the overall analytical sample is n = 18. Despite having an assessment checklist and an electronic form, one of the research coordinators did not record the information for TUG and the two-minute step test for one of the participants at baseline.

**Table 3.** Differences between intervention and control groups (intention-to-treat analysis).


<sup>a</sup> SPPB: Short Physical Performance Battery; <sup>b</sup> TUG: Timed Up & Go; <sup>c</sup> moderate-vigorous physical activity.

Both groups started the study below the normative values of 0.99 for women 60–69 years old for gait speed [63]. The intervention group showed a greater than 1.0 point increase in SPPB score [64]. The TUG results at baseline indicated that the both groups were at increased risk for the development of disability [65]. In the 2-min step test, the intervention group started below the normative value ranges from 75 to 107 for women 60–69 years old [59]. At follow-up, the intervention group's step counts fell within the normative range. ActiGraph data from both groups showed higher MVPA, but lower step counts were found among the intervention group participants.
