Gamifying Accelerometer Use Increases Physical Activity Levels of Sedentary Office Workers

Allene L Gremaud, Lucas J Carr, Jacob E Simmering, Nicholas J Evans, James F Cremer, Alberto M Segre, Linnea A Polgreen, Philip M Polgreen, Allene L Gremaud, Lucas J Carr, Jacob E Simmering, Nicholas J Evans, James F Cremer, Alberto M Segre, Linnea A Polgreen, Philip M Polgreen

Abstract

Background: Sedentary work is hazardous. Over 80% of all US jobs are predominantly sedentary, placing full-time office workers at increased risk for cardiovascular and metabolic morbidity and mortality. Thus, there is a critical need for effective workplace physical activity interventions. MapTrek is a mobile health platform that gamifies Fitbit use for the purpose of promoting physical activity. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of MapTrek for increasing daily steps and moderate-intensity steps over 10 weeks in a sample of sedentary office workers.

Methods and results: Participants included 146 full-time sedentary office workers aged 21 to 65 who reported sitting at least 75% of their workday. Each participant received a Fitbit Zip to wear daily throughout the intervention. Participants were randomized to either a: (1) Fitbit-only group or 2) Fitbit + MapTrek group. Physical activity outcomes and intervention compliance were measured with the Fitbit activity monitor. The Fitbit + MapTrek group significantly increased daily steps (+2092 steps per day) and active minutes (+11.2 min/day) compared to the Fitbit-only arm, but, on average, participants' steps declined during the study period.

Conclusions: MapTrek is an effective approach for increasing physical activity at a clinically meaningful level in sedentary office workers, but as with accelerometer use alone, the effect decreases over time.

Clinical trial registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03109535.

Keywords: intervention; lifestyle; physical exercise.

© 2018 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Screenshots of MapTrek leaderboard, game board, and street view.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average daily minutes with 100+ steps and average daily steps by group over the course of the intervention. Baseline is represented in data point to the left of the horizontal line marked “0,” and intervention days are to the right.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Compliance rates by group over the course of the intervention. The sudden decrease between days 35 and 45 was due to the study suspending messaging and games for a week following an error resulting in inadvertently messaging the participants repeatedly.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Process evaluation data summary (N=72).

References

    1. Warburton DE, Nicol CW, Bredin SS. Health benefits of physical activity: the evidence. CMAJ. 2006;174:801–809.
    1. Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, Macera CA, Heath GW, Thompson PD, Bauman A. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39:1423–1434.
    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;40:181–188.
    1. Metzger JS, Catellier DJ, Evenson KR, Treuth MS, Rosamond WD, Siega‐Riz AM. Patterns of objectively measured physical activity in the United States. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40:630–638.
    1. Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT; Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group . Effect of physical inactivity on major non‐communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet. 2012;380:219–229.
    1. Church TS, Thomas DM, Tudor‐Locke C, Katzmarzyk PT, Earnest CP, Rodarte RQ, Martin CK, Blair SN, Bouchard C. Trends over 5 decades in U.S. occupation‐related physical activity and their associations with obesity. PLoS One. 2011;6:e19657.
    1. Conn VS, Hafdahl AR, Cooper PS, Brown LM, Lusk SL. Meta‐analysis of workplace physical activity interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2009;37:330–339.
    1. Sallis JF, Hovell MF. Determinants of exercise behavior. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1990;18:307–330.
    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;298:2296–2304.
    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:e192.
    1. Murtagh EM, Murphy MH, Boone‐Heinonen J. Walking: the first steps in cardiovascular disease prevention. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2010;25:490–496.
    1. Eyler AA, Brownson RC, Bacak SJ, Housemann RA. The epidemiology of walking for physical activity in the United States. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35:1529–1536.
    1. Sween J, Wallington SF, Sheppard V, Taylor T, Llanos AA, Adams‐Campbell LL. The role of exergaming in improving physical activity: a review. J Phys Act Health. 2014;11:864–870.
    1. Zhang J, Brackbill D, Yang S, Becker J, Herbert N, Centola D. Support or competition? How online social networks increase physical activity: a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med Rep. 2016;4:453–458.
    1. Staiano AE, Abraham AA, Calvert SL. Motivating effects of cooperative exergame play for overweight and obese adolescents. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6:812–819.
    1. Lieberman DA, Chamberlin B, Medina E Jr, Franklin BA, Sanner BM, Vafiadis DK; Power of Play: Innovations in Getting Active Summit Planning Committee . The power of play: innovations in Getting Active Summit 2011: a science panel proceedings report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123:2507–2516.
    1. Feltz DL, Irwin B, Kerr N. Two‐player partnered exergame for obesity prevention: using discrepancy in players’ abilities as a strategy to motivate physical activity. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6:820–827.
    1. Bohannon RW. Number of pedometer‐assessed steps taken per day by adults: a descriptive meta‐analysis. Phys Ther. 2007;87:1642–1650.
    1. Carr LJ, Bartee RT, Dorozynski C, Broomfield JF, Smith ML, Smith DT. Internet‐delivered behavior change program increases physical activity and improves cardiometabolic disease risk factors in sedentary adults: results of a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med. 2008;46:431–438.
    1. Althoff T, White RW, Horvitz E. Influence of Pokémon Go on physical activity: study and implications. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18;e315.
    1. Locke EA, Latham GP. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35‐year odyssey. Am Psychol. 2002;57:705–717.
    1. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic Motivation and Self‐Determination. New York: Plenum Press; 1985.
    1. Deci EL, Betley G, Kahle J, Abrams L, Porac J. When trying to win—competition and intrinsic motivation. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1981;7:79–83.
    1. Frederick‐Recascino CM, Schuster‐Smith H. Competition and intrinsic motivation in physical activity: a comparison of two groups. J Sport Behav. 2003;26:240–254.
    1. Dzewaltowski DA. Physical activity determinants: a social cognitive approach. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994;26:1395–1399.
    1. Atkinson JW. Motivational determinants of risk‐taking behavior. Psychol Rev. 1957;64, Part 1:359–372.
    1. Martinez F, Le Floch V, Gaffie B, Villejoubert G. Reports of wins and risk taking: an investigation of the mediating effect of the illusion of control. J Gambl Stud. 2011;27:271–285.
    1. Gleeson‐Kreig JM. Self‐monitoring of physical activity: effects on self‐efficacy and behavior in people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2006;32:69–77.
    1. Ferguson T, Rowlands AV, Olds T, Maher C. The validity of consumer‐level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free‐living conditions: a cross‐sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:42.
    1. Jensky‐Squires NE, Dieli‐Conwright CM, Rossuello A, Erceg DN, McCauley S, Schroeder ET. Validity and reliability of body composition analysers in children and adults. Br J Nutr. 2008;100:859–865.
    1. Faria SL, Faria OP, Cardeal MD, Ito MK. Validation study of multi‐frequency bioelectrical impedance with dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry among obese patients. Obes Surg. 2014;24:1476–1480.
    1. Breslow NE, Clayton DG. Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models. J Am Stat Assoc. 1993;88:9–25.
    1. R Core Team . R: a language and environment for statistical computing. 2016.
    1. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed‐effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–48.
    1. Yates T, Haffner SM, Schulte PJ, Thomas L, Huffman KM, Bales CW, Califf RM, Holman RR, McMurray JJ, Bethel MA, Tuomilehto J, Davies MJ, Kraus WE. Association between change in daily ambulatory activity and cardiovascular events in people with impaired glucose tolerance (NAVIGATOR trial): a cohort analysis. Lancet. 2014;383:1059–1066.
    1. Tudor‐Locke C, Hatano Y, Pangrazi RP, Kang M. Revisiting “how many steps are enough?” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40:S537–S543.
    1. Blair SN, Connelly JC. How much physical activity should we do? The case for moderate amounts and intensities of physical activity. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1996;67:193–205.
    1. Rowe DA, Welk GJ, Heil DP, Mahar MT, Kemble CD, Calabro MA, Camenisch K. Stride rate recommendations for moderate‐intensity walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43:312–318.
    1. Wen CP, Wai JP, Tsai MK, Yang YC, Cheng TY, Lee MC, Chan HT, Tsao CK, Tsai SP, Wu X. Minimum amount of physical activity for reduced mortality and extended life expectancy: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2011;378:1244–1253.
    1. Martin SS, Feldman DI, Blumenthal RS, Jones SR, Post WS, McKibben RA, Michos ED, Ndumele CE, Ratchford EV, Coresh J, Blaha MJ. mActive: a randomized clinical trial of an automated mHealth intervention for physical activity promotion. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4:e002239 DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002239.
    1. Zhang J, Calabrese C, Ding J, Liu M, Zhang B. Advantages and challenges in using mobile apps for field experiments: a systematic review and a case study. Mobile Media Commun. 2017;6:1–18.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren