GROW: Green Organic Vegetable Gardens to Promote Older Adult Wellness: a Feasibility Study

Abstract

Protecting older adult's cognitive health is a public health priority. Wellness behaviors within 6 domains have demonstrated effectiveness in protecting older adult's cognitive abilities. Interventions targeted to low-income older adults are needed because these populations experience greater social and physical health disparities compared to adults in higher socioeconomic statuses. This study examined the feasibility of engaging independent, community-dwelling older adults living in low-income senior housing in cultivating raised-bed gardens and reviewed the improvements in cognition and nutrition. Ten participants received ergonomic garden tools, seeds, waist-height garden beds, and weekly garden education. Participants planted vegetables of their choosing and tended to their garden beds for 17 weeks. Cognition and nutrition outcomes were measured before and after the intervention. Adults successfully engaged in the intervention throughout the duration and experienced improvement in cognitive and nutrition outcomes.

Health and Nutritional Beliefs and Practices among Rural Elderly Population: An Ethnographic Study in Western Spain

“…As a result, these activities play a different role these days, adding cultural, social and physical values to their importance for agrarian and ecological processes [ 62 ]. Consequently, although existing literature emphasizes the benefits of growing your own produce for the mental and physical wellbeing of the elderly [ 63 , 64 , 65 ], the results of our study showed a limited impact of these practices on dietary patterns.…”

Group-Based Nutrition Interventions to Promote Health and Mobility in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review

“…Session frequency was variable, with weekly delivery most common (n = 13, 42%) (47-50, 54, 56, 63, 65-67, 69, 71, 75) . Interventionists included trained facilitators (n = 6, 19%) (48,52,66,70,73,75) , research personnel (n = 4, 13%) (55,56,61,68) , educators (n = 3, 10%) (54,58,71) , nutritionists (n = 3, 10%) (57,62,69) , physiotherapists and/or trainers (n = 3, 10%) (64,67,72) , registered dietitians (n = 2, 6%) (50,51) , healthcare providers (n = 2, 6%) (63,76) , lay leaders (n = 2, 6%) (53,77) , and peer leaders (n = 2, 6%) (60,74) . Four studies (13%) did not report interventionist details.…”

“…Conversely, two additional studies that combined nutrition education with BCT did not improve nutritional status (moderate to high risk of bias) (57,72) . Two studies (low to moderate risk of bias) evaluated food access or nutrition education with BCT and food access (54,69) ; these did not consistently reduce nutrition risk.…”

“…1). A total of 31 studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis (Table 1), including 11 single group, pre-test/post-test studies (47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57) , 10 RCTs (58)(59)(60)(61)(62)(63)(64)(65)(66)(67) , and 10 nonrandomized, two group study designs (68)(69)(70)(71)(72)(73)(74)(75)(76)(77) . A list of excluded studies with reasons for exclusion is provided in Supplementary Appendix 1.…”

“…(48, 62) , and 4) food access (e.g., mobile markets, gardening, food samples) (n = 2, 6%) (47,54) . Two studies (6%) combined nutrition education with BCT and food access (50,69) .…”