Efficacy and acceptability of using wearable activity trackers in older adults living in retirement communities: a mixed method study

Zhanjia Zhang, Bruno Giordani, Alayna Margulis, Weiyun Chen, Zhanjia Zhang, Bruno Giordani, Alayna Margulis, Weiyun Chen

Abstract

Background: Wearable activity trackers hold the potential for enhancing health and fitness, but the use of wearable activity trackers has remained largely unexplored in older adults. The purpose of the current study was to examine the effectiveness and acceptability of wearable activity trackers for promoting physical activity (PA) in older adults living in retirement communities.

Methods: Forty older adult participants (mean age = 85.4 years) used a wearable activity tracker (Fitbit InspireHR) for 12 weeks. Participants were provided with personalized activity goals and weekly feedback of PA during the 12 weeks. The main outcomes were daily step counts collected at baseline and the end of the intervention, and participants' experiences of using the wearable activity tracker assessed after the 12-week intervention through an 8-item questionnaire and individual interviews.

Results: Participants used the activity tracker on 97.5% of measured days and had an average increase of 900 steps/day (p < 0.001). The Acceptance questionnaire revealed that the wearable activity tracker was acceptable, useful, and easy to use. Participants found that wearable activity trackers helped improve self-awareness and motivation of PA but reported a few concerns regarding the comfort of wearing the activity trackers and the ease of reading visual feedback.

Conclusions: Wearable activity trackers lead to a small but significant increase of PA and are perceived as acceptable and useful in older adults. Given the rapidly growing older population, wearable activity trackers are promising tools that could be used in large-scale interventions to improve PA and health in older adults.

Trial registration: Registered on Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT05233813 (Registered on 10/02/2022).

Keywords: Exercise; Retirement community; Self-regulation; Technology.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Average daily step counts over the 12 weeks. Note: error bars denote standard error of the mean

References

    1. Chodzko-Zajko WJ, Proctor DN, Singh MAF, Minson CT, Nigg CR, Salem GJ, Skinner JS. Exercise and physical activity for older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(7):1510–1530. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181a0c95c.
    1. US Department of Health and Human Services . Physical activity guidelines for Americans. 2. Wasington, DC: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2018.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Data. Hyattsville: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2012.
    1. Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Masse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M. Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(1):181–188. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3.
    1. Stathokostas L, Jones GR. Exercise modality choices one year after intervention in previously inactive older men and women. J Aging Phys Act. 2016;24(3):435–443. doi: 10.1123/japa.2015-0167.
    1. Niven AG, Markland D. Using self-determination theory to understand motivation for walking: instrument development and model testing using Bayesian structural equation modelling. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2016;23:90–100. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2015.11.004.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Preventing obesity and chronic diseases through good nutrition and physical activity. Hyattsville: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2008.
    1. Heath GW, Parra DC, Sarmiento OL, Andersen LB, Owen N, Goenka S, Montes F, Brownson RC. Group LPASW: evidence-based intervention in physical activity: lessons from around the world. Lancet. 2012;380(9838):272–281. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60816-2.
    1. Michie S, Abraham C, Whittington C, McAteer J, Gupta S. Effective techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: a meta-regression. Health Psychol. 2009;28(6):690–701. doi: 10.1037/a0016136.
    1. Bandura A. Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):248–287. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L.
    1. Ashford S, Edmunds J, French DP. What is the best way to change self-efficacy to promote lifestyle and recreational physical activity? A systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Health Psychol. 2010;15(2):265–288. doi: 10.1348/135910709X461752.
    1. Lyons EJ, Lewis ZH, Mayrsohn BG, Rowland JL. Behavior change techniques implemented in electronic lifestyle activity monitors: a systematic content analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(8):e192. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3469.
    1. Wang JB, Cadmus-Bertram LA, Natarajan L, White MM, Madanat H, Nichols JF, Ayala GX, Pierce JP. Wearable sensor/device (Fitbit one) and SMS text-messaging prompts to increase physical activity in overweight and obese adults: a randomized controlled trial. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21(10):782–792. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2014.0176.
    1. de Rezende LFM, Rey-López JP, Matsudo VKR, do Carmo Luiz O. Sedentary behavior and health outcomes among older adults: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2014;14(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1.
    1. Anderson M, Perrin A. Technology use among seniors. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for Internet & Technology; 2017.
    1. Cadmus-Bertram L, Marcus BH, Patterson RE, Parker BA, Morey BL. Randomized trial of a Fitbit-based physical activity intervention for women. Am J Prev Med. 2015;49(3):414–418. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.01.020.
    1. Thompson WG, Kuhle CL, Koepp GA, McCrady-Spitzer SK, Levine JA. “Go4Life” exercise counseling, accelerometer feedback, and activity levels in older people. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2014;58(3):314–319. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2014.01.004.
    1. Nguyen NH, Hadgraft NT, Moore MM, Rosenberg DE, Lynch C, Reeves MM, Lynch BM. A qualitative evaluation of breast cancer survivors’ acceptance of and preferences for consumer wearable technology activity trackers. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(11):3375–3384. doi: 10.1007/s00520-017-3756-y.
    1. Rosenberg D, Kadokura EA, Bouldin ED, Miyawaki CE, Higano CS, Hartzler AL. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings: 2016: American Medical Informatics Association. 2016. Acceptability of Fitbit for physical activity tracking within clinical care among men with prostate cancer; p. 1050.
    1. Borson S, Scanlan JM, Chen P, Ganguli M. The Mini-cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51(10):1451–1454. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51465.x.
    1. Bravata DM, Smith-Spangler C, Sundaram V, Gienger AL, Lin N, Lewis R, Stave CD, Olkin I, Sirard JR. Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review. JAMA. 2007;298(19):2296–2304. doi: 10.1001/jama.298.19.2296.
    1. Lee I-M, Shiroma EJ, Kamada M, Bassett DR, Matthews CE, Buring JE. Association of step volume and intensity with all-cause mortality in older women. JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(8):1105–1112. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.0899.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, McCormack G. Tracking of pedometer-determined physical activity in adults who relocate: results from RESIDE. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008;5(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-39.
    1. Paul SS, Tiedemann A, Hassett LM, Ramsay E, Kirkham C, Chagpar S, Sherrington C. Validity of the Fitbit activity tracker for measuring steps in community-dwelling older adults. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2015;1(1):1–5. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2015-000013.
    1. Mercer K, Giangregorio L, Schneider E, Chilana P, Li M, Grindrod K. Acceptance of commercially available wearable activity trackers among adults aged over 50 and with chronic illness: a mixed-methods evaluation. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4(1):e7. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.4225.
    1. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989;13(3):319–340. doi: 10.2307/249008.
    1. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge Academic; 1988.
    1. Patel AV, Hildebrand JS, Leach CR, Campbell PT, Doyle C, Shuval K, Wang Y, Gapstur SM. Walking in relation to mortality in a large prospective cohort of older US adults. Am J Prev Med. 2018;54(1):10–19. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.08.019.
    1. Koizumi D, Rogers NL, Rogers ME, Islam MM, Kusunoki M, Takeshima N. Efficacy of an accelerometer-guided physical activity intervention in community-dwelling older women. J Phys Act Health. 2009;6(4):467–474. doi: 10.1123/jpah.6.4.467.
    1. Lunney JR, Lynn J, Foley DJ, Lipson S, Guralnik JM. Patterns of functional decline at the end of life. JAMA. 2003;289(18):2387–2392. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.18.2387.
    1. Patel MS, Asch DA, Volpp KG. Wearable devices as facilitators, not drivers, of health behavior change. JAMA. 2015;313(5):459–460. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.14781.
    1. Shahid Z, Kalayanamitra R, McClafferty B, Kepko D, Ramgobin D, Patel R, Aggarwal CS, Vunnam R, Sahu N, Bhatt D. COVID-19 and older adults: what we know. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020;68(5):926–929. doi: 10.1111/jgs.16472.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit