Cargando…
Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of physical activity monitor (PAM) based interventions among adults and explore reasons for the heterogeneity. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. STUDY SELECTION: The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Centra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8791066/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35082116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068047 |
_version_ | 1784640141513457664 |
---|---|
author | Larsen, Rasmus Tolstrup Wagner, Vibeke Korfitsen, Christoffer Bruun Keller, Camilla Juhl, Carsten Bogh Langberg, Henning Christensen, Jan |
author_facet | Larsen, Rasmus Tolstrup Wagner, Vibeke Korfitsen, Christoffer Bruun Keller, Camilla Juhl, Carsten Bogh Langberg, Henning Christensen, Jan |
author_sort | Larsen, Rasmus Tolstrup |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of physical activity monitor (PAM) based interventions among adults and explore reasons for the heterogeneity. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. STUDY SELECTION: The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched on 4 June 2021. Eligible randomised controlled trials compared interventions in which adults received feedback from PAMs with control interventions in which no feedback was provided. No restrictions on type of outcome measurement, publication date, or language were applied. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to synthesise the results. The certainty of evidence was rated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The three primary outcomes of interest were physical activity, moderate to vigorous physical activity, and sedentary time. RESULTS: 121 randomised controlled trials with 141 study comparisons, including 16 743 participants, were included. The PAM based interventions showed a moderate effect (standardised mean difference 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.55) on physical activity, equivalent to 1235 daily steps; a small effect (0.23, 0.16 to 0.30) on moderate to vigorous physical activity, equivalent to 48.5 weekly minutes; and a small insignificant effect (−0.12, −0.25 to 0.01) on sedentary time, equal to 9.9 daily minutes. All outcomes favoured the PAM interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The certainty of evidence was low for the effect of PAM based interventions on physical activity and moderate for moderate to vigorous physical activity and sedentary time. PAM based interventions are safe and effectively increase physical activity and moderate to vigorous physical activity. The effect on physical activity and moderate to vigorous physical activity is well established but might be overestimated owing to publication bias. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018102719. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8791066 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87910662022-02-07 Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis Larsen, Rasmus Tolstrup Wagner, Vibeke Korfitsen, Christoffer Bruun Keller, Camilla Juhl, Carsten Bogh Langberg, Henning Christensen, Jan BMJ Research OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effectiveness of physical activity monitor (PAM) based interventions among adults and explore reasons for the heterogeneity. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. STUDY SELECTION: The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched on 4 June 2021. Eligible randomised controlled trials compared interventions in which adults received feedback from PAMs with control interventions in which no feedback was provided. No restrictions on type of outcome measurement, publication date, or language were applied. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to synthesise the results. The certainty of evidence was rated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The three primary outcomes of interest were physical activity, moderate to vigorous physical activity, and sedentary time. RESULTS: 121 randomised controlled trials with 141 study comparisons, including 16 743 participants, were included. The PAM based interventions showed a moderate effect (standardised mean difference 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.55) on physical activity, equivalent to 1235 daily steps; a small effect (0.23, 0.16 to 0.30) on moderate to vigorous physical activity, equivalent to 48.5 weekly minutes; and a small insignificant effect (−0.12, −0.25 to 0.01) on sedentary time, equal to 9.9 daily minutes. All outcomes favoured the PAM interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The certainty of evidence was low for the effect of PAM based interventions on physical activity and moderate for moderate to vigorous physical activity and sedentary time. PAM based interventions are safe and effectively increase physical activity and moderate to vigorous physical activity. The effect on physical activity and moderate to vigorous physical activity is well established but might be overestimated owing to publication bias. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018102719. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2022-01-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8791066/ /pubmed/35082116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068047 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Larsen, Rasmus Tolstrup Wagner, Vibeke Korfitsen, Christoffer Bruun Keller, Camilla Juhl, Carsten Bogh Langberg, Henning Christensen, Jan Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | effectiveness of physical activity monitors in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8791066/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35082116 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068047 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT larsenrasmustolstrup effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wagnervibeke effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT korfitsenchristofferbruun effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kellercamilla effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT juhlcarstenbogh effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT langberghenning effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT christensenjan effectivenessofphysicalactivitymonitorsinadultssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |