Consumer-Based Wearable Activity Trackers Increase Physical Activity Participation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background The range of benefits associated with regular physical activity participation is irrefutable. Despite the well-known benefits, physical inactivity remains one of the major contributing factors to ill-health throughout industrialized countries. Traditional lifestyle interventions such as group education or telephone counseling are effective at increasing physical activity participation; however, physical activity levels tend to decline over time. Consumer-based wearable activity trackers that allow users to objectively monitor activity levels are now widely available and may offer an alternative method for assisting individuals to remain physically active. Objective This review aimed to determine the effects of interventions utilizing consumer-based wearable activity trackers on physical activity participation and sedentary behavior when compared with interventions that do not utilize activity tracker feedback. Methods A systematic review was performed searching the following databases for studies that included the use of a consumer-based wearable activity tracker to improve physical activity participation: Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus, and Health Technology Assessments. Controlled trials of adults comparing the use of a consumer-based wearable activity tracker with other nonactivity tracker–based interventions were included. The main outcome measures were physical activity participation and sedentary behavior. All studies were assessed for risk of bias, and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to rank the quality of evidence. The guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement were followed. A random-effects meta-analysis was completed on the included outcome measures to estimate the treatment effect of interventions that included an activity tracker compared with a control group. Results There was a significant increase in daily step count (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.24; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.33; P <.001), moderate and vigorous physical activity (SMD 0.27; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.39; P <.001), and energy expenditure (SMD 0.28; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.54; P =.03) and a nonsignificant decrease in sedentary behavior (SMD −0.20; 95% CI −0.43 to 0.03; P =.08) following the intervention versus control comparator across all studies in the meta-analyses. In general, included studies were at low risk of bias, except for performance bias. Heterogeneity varied across the included meta-analyses ranging from low (I 2 =3%) for daily step count through to high (I 2 =67%) for sedentary behavior. Conclusions Utilizing a con...

Succeeding with prolonged usage of consumer-based activity trackers in clinical studies: A mixed methods approach

“…This may also indicate that having access to activity output for self-monitoring and being able to compare and compete with others was a possible source of motivation for prolonged wear time. This observation supports earlier ndings which shows that activity tracker feedback can motivate PA participation in and of itself [14,15,16]. This effect must thus be considered when planning and analysing results of a PA intervention, to avoid ascribing increased PA participation to the intervention when the activity tracker itself may have been a major source of motivation.…”

“…Most users, when buying a new activity tracker, tend to stop using it after a few months, mostly due to loss of motivation [14,49]. In the present study, only two of 16 stopped using the activity tracker after six months (i.e.…”

“…Validation studies on such activity trackers show different results, but several recent reviews show that some metrics for some activity trackers are accurate enough to measure PA in research settings [9,10,11,12,13]. In addition, a recent meta-analysis by Brickwood et al [14] indicates that including an activity tracker as part of a PA intervention may increase PA participation through self-monitoring as well as assist researchers in participant monitoring. This is also supported by earlier systematic reviews, where De Vries et al [15] found an increase of PA in adults with overweight and obesity, and Lewis et al [16] found similar ndings among intervention studies on adults.…”

Older adults’ experiences of using a wearable activity tracker with health professional feedback over a 12-month randomised controlled trial

“…Wearable activity trackers have been shown to increase short-term physical activity participation across a range of populations, including healthy adults, chronic disease populations and older adults. [13][14][15][16] Activity trackers, and their associated mobile applications (apps), are unique in that they provide users with real-time feedback about their physical activity participation, including a range of behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and do not require trained health professionals to deliver it. However, to receive the feedback, users must be able to operate the trackers and apps, and the feedback provided is generally generic in nature, which may influence the user's perceptions and habitual use of the technology.…”

Polar Vantage and Oura physical activity and sleep trackers: A validation and comparison study

“…Consumer-based activity trackers are increasingly used in research as it has potential to increase activity participation [5]. Consumer-based activity trackers are often cheaper, less intrusive, and with increased battery and storage capacity, compared to research-based accelerometers.…”