A feasibility study of activity tracking devices in pregnancy
Michelle A Kominiarek, Lauren C Balmert, Hallie Tolo, William Grobman, Melissa Simon, Michelle A Kominiarek, Lauren C Balmert, Hallie Tolo, William Grobman, Melissa Simon
Abstract
Background: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of using an activity-tracking device (ATD) during pregnancy and compare self-reported to ATD-calculated energy expenditure in a 2-phase study.
Methods: (Phase 1) Twenty-five pregnant women were asked about exercise, computer use, smartphone ownership, and ATD attitudes. Descriptive statistics were reported. (Phase 2) Women ≥18 years, smartphone owners, < 16-weeks gestation, and without exercise restrictions were approached to participate in 2016-2017. Women received instructions to wear and sync the ATD daily. We assessed protocol adherence and satisfaction via surveys at 36-weeks and used mixed models to assess the relationship between gestational age and ATD data. Energy expenditure from the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ) was compared to ATD-calculated energy expenditure.
Results: (Phase 1) Walking was the most common exercise; 8% did not perform any activity during pregnancy. All women had internet access and owned a smartphone. Women stated they would wear the ATD all the time during a pregnancy (88%), with the intent to improve their health (80%). (Phase 2) The characteristics of the 48 women were: pre-pregnancy BMI 28, 62% non-Hispanic black, 62% multiparas. Of the 18 women who completed the 36-week survey, only 56% wore the ATD daily, 33% had a lost or broken ATD, and 17% had technical problems; however, 94% enjoyed wearing it, 94% would recommend it to a pregnant friend, and 78% thought it helped them reach activity goals. According to ATD data, the median number of active days was 41 (IQR 20-73) and the median proportion of active days out of potential days was 22% (IQR 11-40). As gestational age increased, mean log steps decreased, active minutes decreased, and sedentary hours increased in unadjusted and adjusted models (P < 0.05 all comparisons). There were no differences in mean energy expenditure (MET-h/week) estimated by PPAQ or ATD data at 28 weeks gestation [212 (22-992 range) vs. 234 (200-281 range), P = 0.66] and at 36 weeks [233 (86-907 range) vs. 218 (151-273 range), P = 0.68]).
Conclusions: Women reported high motivation to wear an ATD and high satisfaction with actually using an ATD during pregnancy; however adherence to the study protocol was lower than expected and ATD technical problems were frequent.
Keywords: Feasibility study; Physical activity; Pregnancy; Prenatal care.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Figures
References
- ACOG Committee Opinion No 650: physical activity and exercise during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(6):e135–e142. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001214.
- Muktabhant B, Lawrie TA, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M. Diet or exercise, or both, for preventing excessive weight gain in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;6:CD007145.
- Peaceman AM, Clifton RG, Phelan S, Gallagher D, Evans M, Redman LM, et al. Lifestyle interventions limit gestational weight gain in women with overweight or obesity: life-moms prospective meta-analysis. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2018;26(9):1396–1404. doi: 10.1002/oby.22250.
- Lim S, O'Reilly S, Behrens H, Skinner T, Ellis I, Dunbar JA. Effective strategies for weight loss in post-partum women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2015;16(11):972–987. doi: 10.1111/obr.12312.
- Wallwiener S, Muller M, Doster A, Laserer W, Reck C, Pauluschke-Frohlich J, et al. Pregnancy eHealth and mHealth: user proportions and characteristics of pregnant women using web-based information sources-a cross-sectional study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016;294(5):937–944. doi: 10.1007/s00404-016-4093-y.
- Kominiarek MA, Vyhmeister H, Balmert LC, Fairchild P, Tolo H, Grobman W, et al. Activity tracking devices in group prenatal care: a feasibility study. Biores Open Access. 2018;7(1):165–176. doi: 10.1089/biores.2018.0021.
- Grym K, Niela-Vilen H, Ekholm E, Hamari L, Azimi I, Rahmani A, et al. Feasibility of smart wristbands for continuous monitoring during pregnancy and one month after birth. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2187-9.
- Institute of Medicine. Weight gain during pregnancy: reexamining the guidelines. Washington, D.C. 2009.
- Lindseth G, Vari P. Measuring physical activity during pregnancy. West J Nurs Res. 2005;27(6):722–734. doi: 10.1177/0193945905276523.
- Downs DS, LeMasurier GC, DiNallo JM. Baby steps: pedometer-determined and self-reported leisure-time exercise behaviors of pregnant women. J Phys Act Health. 2009;6(1):63–72. doi: 10.1123/jpah.6.1.63.
- Tudor-Locke C, Craig CL, Brown WJ, Clemes SA, De Cocker K, Giles-Corti B, et al. How many steps/day are enough? For adults Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:79. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-79.
- Cohen TR, Plourde H, Koski KG. Use of the pregnancy physical activity questionnaire (ppaq) to identify behaviours associated with appropriate gestational weight gain during pregnancy. J Phys Act Health. 2013;10(7):1000–1007. doi: 10.1123/jpah.10.7.1000.
- Cadmus-Bertram LA, 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.
- Huberty JL, Buman MP, Leiferman JA, Bushar J, Adams MA. Trajectories of objectively-measured physical activity and sedentary time over the course of pregnancy in women self-identified as inactive. Prev Med Rep. 2016;3:353–360. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.04.004.
- van den Heuvel JF, Groenhof TK, Veerbeek JH, van Solinge WW, Lely AT, Franx A, et al. eHealth as the next-generation perinatal care: an overview of the literature. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(6):e202. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9262.
- Forczek W, Curylo M, Forczek B. Physical activity assessment during gestation and its outcomes: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2017;72(7):425–444. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000000458.
- Kooiman TJ, Dontje ML, Sprenger SR, Krijnen WP, van der Schans CP, de Groot M. Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2015;7:24. doi: 10.1186/s13102-015-0018-5.
- Evenson KR, Goto MM, Furberg RD. Systematic review of the validity and reliability of consumer-wearable activity trackers. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:159. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0314-1.
- Conway MR, Marshall MR, Schlaff RA, Pfeiffer KA, Pivarnik JM. Physical activity device reliability and validity during pregnancy and postpartum. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018;50(3):617–623. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001469.
Source: PubMed