Users’ experiences of wearable activity trackers: a cross-sectional study

Maher, Carol; Ryan, Jillian; Ambrosi, Christina; Edney, Sarah

doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4888-1

Cited by 141 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mercer et al and Rosenberg et al both suggested that usability could be improved by having more compatible computers and smartphones, comprehensive paper manuals, and apps that interpret the user data. Studies among the elderly and adults [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] showed considerable similarities with the results of this study and those of Mercer et al and Rosenberg et al Older people and adults accepted the activity tracker, found them stimulating, increased awareness, and experienced them as useful. However, especially elderly stated they would prefer an activity tracker which is easier to use and adapted to their needs and skills.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patients’ experiences with commercially available activity trackers embedded in physiotherapy treatment: a qualitative study

Ummels

Beekman

Moser

et al. 2019

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of this study was to describe the experience with commercially available activity trackers embedded in the physiotherapy treatment of patients with a chronic disease. Methods: In a qualitative study, 29 participants with a chronic disease participated. They wore an activity tracker for two to eight weeks. Data were collected using 23 interviews and discussion with 6 participants. A framework analysis was used to analyze the data. Results: The framework analysis resulted in seven categories: purchase, instruction, characteristics, correct functioning, sharing data, privacy, use, and interest in feedback. The standard goal of the activity trackers was experienced as too high, however the tracker still motivated them to be more active. Participants would have liked more guidance from their physiotherapists because they experienced the trackers as complex. Participants experienced some technical failures, are willing to share data with their physiotherapist and, want to spend a maximum of e50,-. Conclusion: The developed framework gives insight into all important concepts from the experiences reported by patients with a chronic disease and can be used to guide further research and practice. Patients with a chronic disease were positive regarding activity trackers in general. When embedded in physiotherapy, more attention should be paid to the integration in treatment. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION Activity trackers are perceived by patients with a chronic disease, as motivating them to be more physically active and to reach daily activity goals. The standard goal of 10.000 steps of the activity trackers is often perceived as too high, patients with a chronic disease would like to make a personal activity goal together with their physiotherapist. Patients with a chronic disease experience commercially available activity trackers often as too complex for their technical skills, they would like more guidance from their physiotherapist about the use and interpretation of an activity tracker.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Feasibility aspects such as user-friendliness and sustained use of activity trackers have been studied in healthy adults [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] and the elderly [23][24][25][26][27][28]. From these studies it appears that in general, healthy adults and the elderly are open and positive towards the use of activity trackers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ experiences with commercially available activity trackers embedded in physiotherapy treatment: a qualitative study

Ummels

Beekman

Moser

et al. 2019

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most commonly mentioned disadvantages of the device were the short lifespan of the battery, the difficulty in synchronization and the inaccurately measured data. These findings are consistent with a previous work, in which (Maher et al, 2017) found that the battery lifespam was the participants' main complaint regarding activity trackers (Schaben, Furness, 2018).…”

Section: "I Have Knowledge About How Many Steps I Take and What My Slsupporting

confidence: 93%

Wearable Activity Trackers Usage among University Students

2019

European Journal of Contemporary Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In spite of the fact that physical activity is inevitable in sustaining health, there are more people in the world who do not take it into account than who do. A growing number of young adults have been using wearable activity trackers, particularly step counts, to keep an eye on their health in the past few years. In an online survey university students were interviewed as a focus group. All members were current wearable activity trackers. Data was analyzed with SPSS 22 version. Beside descriptive statistics we applied Pearson's Khi square test (χ 2 ) and independent samples test, as well. We considered the results of statistical tests significant in case of p< 0.05. The wearable devices that participants used were wristbands (65.1%, n=95) and smartwatches (34.9 %, n=51). Their number one purpose was to measure step counts (93.2%, n=136) and sleep patterns (63.7 %, n=93) with the devices. The highest number of people answered to the question of what is the main purpose of using these devices that they monitored daily physical activity with it (56.2 % n=82). The majority of the conveners do regular sports and in general exercise on 3.84 days for 30 minutes (Mode=3.0, Median=4.0, SD=1.78). Only 3.4 % of the (n=19) are not engaged in any sort of physical exercise. A significant discrepancy could be observed in the number of days spent doing sports between wearable activity tracker users and non-users in favour of users (users: Mean=4.26 SD=1.83; non user: Mean=3.69 SD=1.74; t=3.279, p< 0.01). 70.6 % of smart watch wearers claimed that using the device took positive effects on their physical activity and only 29.4 % stated that their habits were not altered by the trackers. 42.1 % of those wearing wristband trackers increased their physical activity as a result of wearing the gadget, whereas 57.9 % of them were not affected in their physical activity (χ 2 =10.839, df=2, p< 0.05). The publication is supported by the EFOP-3.6.1-16-2016-00022 project. The project is co-financed by the European Union and the European Social Fund.

show abstract

“…With respect to validity and reliability, studies have demonstrated acceptable measurement properties of activity monitors [9], although limitations were noted in populations with low walking speed [10]. User acceptance of consumer activity trackers is high as a result of the technological improvements in functionality, appeal, and form factor [11,12]. As for the impact at point of care, a recent study by Birkeland et al [13] illustrated that wearable device-determined step count was able to determine treatment effect in patients with coronary microvascular dysfunction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Free-Living Physical Activity Monitoring in Adult US Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Using a Consumer Wearable Device

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Wearable devices have been used to characterize physical activity in multiple sclerosis (MS). The objectives of this study were to advance the literature on the utility of free-living physical activity tracking from secondary analyses of a pilot study in MS patients. Method: The original observational study was conducted in participants with MS at PatientsLikeMe (www.PatientsLikeMe.com), an online network of patients with chronic diseases. Participants completed a baseline self-assessment, and received a Fitbit One^TM wearable device with instructions to upload data. Eligible participants (1) self-reported MS, (2) logged on to the PatientsLikeMe website 90 days prior to enrollment, and (3) consented to participate electronically. Participants (1) < 18 years, (2) living outside the United States, and (3) requiring wheelchair assistance for most daily activities were excluded. The secondary analyses were limited to participants with complete data on MS type, disease duration, and Multiple Sclerosis Rating Scale (MSRS) and at least 7 days of wearable data. Step count was used as a measure of physical activity. Results: The analysis cohort of 114 participants uploaded a mean of 20.1 days of wearable data over the 23-day study (87% adherence); participants averaged 4,393 steps per day. The mean age of participants was 52 years, predominantly female (75%), relapsing-remitting type (79%), with mean disease duration of 16 years. Mean MSRS score within 30-day of baseline was 32; 72% reported mild-moderate walking disability. The reliability of step count measured by intraclass correlation was 0.55 for a single day, ≥0.7 for 2-day average, and ≥0.9 for 7-day average. After controlling for covariates, self-reported disease severity (MSRS quartile) was an independent predictor of step count (p < 0.001). Least square means (LS means) for participants that were least disabled (lowest quartile) was 5,937 steps, which was significantly higher than participants in the second, third, and fourth quartiles (4,570, 3,490, and 3,272, respectively). Similarly, LS means of participants with no ambulatory disability (measured by MSRS walk component) was 6,931 steps, significantly higher than participants with greater disability (4,743, 4,394, 2,727 steps for symptomatic, mild, and moderate disability, respectively, p < 0.001). Discussion: Using an interactive platform, this study captured free-living mobility data in MS patients. Important metrics such as the use of a minimum of 2-day estimates and self-reported disability were found to be robust indicators and correlates, respectively, of participant activity levels. Further triangulation of such metrics may reduce the burden on patients, clinicians, and researchers when monitoring clinical status.

show abstract