Exercise is Medicine Part 3
Prescribing exercise
Although there are powerful arguments that exercise is medicine, prescribing exercise is very different to prescribing drugs. Drug prescription means:
1. The “patient” has a medical problem which should benefit from medication – or is at risk of such a problem. Guidelines exist to help the prescriber make such decisions.
With exercise there are numerous medical problems which can be prevented and/or treated by exercise. Indeed there are few who do not benefit.
2. A dose can be prescribed which is appropriate for the condition being treated.
With exercise, this cannot be as exact as drug prescription has to be. The Department of Health produces guidelines for exercise prescription – 150 minutes per week of moderate to vigorous exercise with muscle strengthening exercises on two days per week. Unlike drugs, any dose of exercise is beneficial. Underdosing and overdosing do not carry either the loss of effect or a serious risk of side effects.
3. The instructions for taking medication are straightforward and rarely take time to explain.
This is not so with exercise – an effective exercise prescription requires time-consuming discussion of the type of exercise and where to get it, and also the frequency, intensity and duration. Just recommendation increase in physical activity is very unlikely to have much effect.
An exercise prescription should include the following specific recommendations:
Type of exercise or activity (eg, walking, swimming, cycling)
Specific workloads (eg, watts, walking speed)
Duration and frequency of the activity or exercise session
Intensity guidelines – Target heart rate (THR) range and estimated rate of perceived exertion (RPE)
Precautions regarding certain orthopedic (or other) concerns or related comments
4. The effect of the drug can be measured – either in numerical form like weight or blood pressure or from the patient’s symptoms like pain relief or lifting of depression.
If exercise is prescribed for high blood pressure or for depression the outcome can be measured. But one of the most desirably effects of exercise is disease prevention – only measurable from the outcomes for large groups. The ideal measure would be the change in level of physical fitness after a period of exercise. This is not easy and can be expensive.
5. Although compliance can be a problem it can safely be assumed that the “patient” is likely to take the medication.
This is not true of exercise – indeed it is more accurate to assume that this particular medicine is not being taken – and if it is, the “patient’s” word about the degree of compliance is not reliable. Research has found that a doctor’s recommendation to take more exercise has little effect on the patient’s physical activity.
How often do doctors prescribe exercise?
Very seldom! Research has shown that even when the patient presents with a condition which would benefit, exercise is unlikely to be even mentioned – the doctor is much more attuned to dashing off a prescription. If exercise is mentioned it is likely to be a general recommendation rather than anything more precise. Because:
- Prescribing exercise and physical activity is time consuming
- It is a very lowly part of medical training. Exercise physiology is not part of the medical curriculum.
There are no incentives for the doctor.
The QOF incentive
- Much of a general practitioner’s income is decided by the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF). This is a large number of measures or indicators of the doctors’ performance. These indicators include having a register of a number of different diseases which are commonly seen in the surgery – heart disease, asthma, diabetes etc. Other indicators include the range of tests given for different diagnostic groups and the outcomes such as blood pressure, blood sugar, cholesterol levels etc.
- The maximum number of points is 635 per annum, worth £213 each – a maximum possible income from this source of £135,255.
- Of the 635 points, 60 are awarded for prescribing certain medications for certain conditions – ie statins for patients with coronary disease.
Exercise is not mentioned in QOF and the only reference exercise or physical activity is the requirement for patients with chronic lung disease to have been invited to take past in a pulmonary rehabilitation programme. That is worth 2 (yes two) points.
In brief, about 9% of the contribution of QOF to a doctor’s income comes from recommending treatments for particular conditions. 0.003% comes from recommending an intervention which might increase physical activity. What an incentive!
Next time
What might a prescription for exercise look like?

Subscribe to the blog
Categories
- Accelerometer
- Alzheimer's disease
- Blood pressure
- BMI
- Cancer
- Complications
- Coronary disease
- Cycling
- Dementia
- Diabetes
- Events
- Evidence
- Exercise promotion
- Frailty
- Healthspan
- Hearty News
- Heat
- Hypertension
- Ill effects
- Infections
- Lifespan
- Lipids
- Lung disease
- Mental health
- Mental health
- Muscles
- Obesity
- Osteoporosis
- Oxygen uptake
- Parkinson's Disease
- Physical activity
- Physical fitness
- Pregnancy
- Running
- Sedentary behaviour
- Strength training
- Stroke
- Uncategorized
- Walking
Thank you, Hugh. Most informative. I have certainly benefitted from regular exercise at Cardiac Rehab in Alton.
Many thanks Rick
I am delighted that it is helpful
Really interesting. I wonder if there is data that correlates to higher prescribed exercise in areas of the country that have cardio rehab? I know from a support group I am involved in the criteria and availability varies significantly across the country and we are so lucky to have such amazing facilities and dedicated staff in Alton. Quite shocking to read how little incentive is given to exercise but completely understanding when there are too few GPs and high demands. Definitely needs better partnership working across health, social, education and voluntary agencies in tackling the challenges of increasing uptake of exercise. I definitely view exercise as the ‘5th pillar’ to my HF meds and am very grateful for all the support.
Many thanks Avril
I am pleased to say that all hospitals which treat heart patients also now have access to cardiac rehabilitation. However, as you say, there is considerable variation from one centre to another. I am also pleased to say that over time the less well performing centres are definitely improving as shown in the annual audit carried out by the BACPR – British Association for Prevention and Cardiac Rehabilitation. There is still a long way to go – political action might help but is low on the agenda of the DoH.
Thank you, always inspiring
Chris Francis
Many thanks Chris