About: Pedometer is a(n) research topic. Over the lifetime, 946 publication(s) have been published within this topic receiving 32264 citation(s).
Dena M. Bravata1, Crystal Smith-Spangler2, Vandana Sundaram, Allison Gienger +5 more•Institutions (2)
21 Nov 2007-JAMA
Abstract: ContextWithout detailed evidence of their effectiveness, pedometers have recently become popular as a tool for motivating physical activity.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of pedometer use with physical activity and health outcomes among outpatient adults.Data SourcesEnglish-language articles from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Sport Discus, PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, Thompson Scientific (formerly known as Thompson ISI), and ERIC (1966-2007); bibliographies of retrieved articles; and conference proceedings.Study SelectionStudies were eligible for inclusion if they reported an assessment of pedometer use among adult outpatients, reported a change in steps per day, and included more than 5 participants.Data Extraction and Data SynthesisTwo investigators independently abstracted data about the intervention; participants; number of steps per day; and presence or absence of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. Data were pooled using random-effects calculations, and meta-regression was performed.ResultsOur searches identified 2246 citations; 26 studies with a total of 2767 participants met inclusion criteria (8 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 18 observational studies). The participants' mean (SD) age was 49 (9) years and 85% were women. The mean intervention duration was 18 weeks. In the RCTs, pedometer users significantly increased their physical activity by 2491 steps per day more than control participants (95% confidence interval [CI], 1098-3885 steps per day, P < .001). Among the observational studies, pedometer users significantly increased their physical activity by 2183 steps per day over baseline (95% CI, 1571-2796 steps per day, P < .0001). Overall, pedometer users increased their physical activity by 26.9% over baseline. An important predictor of increased physical activity was having a step goal such as 10 000 steps per day (P = .001). When data from all studies were combined, pedometer users significantly decreased their body mass index by 0.38 (95% CI, 0.05-0.72; P = .03). This decrease was associated with older age (P = .001) and having a step goal (P = .04). Intervention participants significantly decreased their systolic blood pressure by 3.8 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.7-5.9 mm Hg, P < .001). This decrease was associated with greater baseline systolic blood pressure (P = .009) and change in steps per day (P = .08).ConclusionsThe results suggest that the use of a pedometer is associated with significant increases in physical activity and significant decreases in body mass index and blood pressure. Whether these changes are durable over the long term is undetermined.
Topics: Pedometer (52%)
01 Mar 2011-Health Reports
Abstract: Background Physical activity is an important determinant of health and ﬁ tness. This study provides contemporary estimates of the physical activity levels of Canadians aged 6 to 19 years. Data and methods Data are from the 2007 to 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. The physical activity of a nationally representative sample was measured using accelerometers. Data are presented as time spent in sedentary, light, moderate and vigorous intensity movement, and in steps accumulated per day. Results An estimated 9% of boys and 4% of girls accumulate 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity on at least 6 days a week. Regardless of age group, boys are more active than girls. Canadian children and youth spend 8.6 hours per day—62% of their waking hours—in sedentary pursuits. Daily step counts average 12,100 for boys and 10,300 for girls. Interpretation Based on objective and robust measures, physical activity levels of Canadian children and youth are low. Keywords Actical, pedometer, sedentary behaviour, obesity, public health, motion sensor
Topics: Pedometer (51%)
01 Feb 2004-Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
Abstract: PATRICK L. SCHNEIDER, SCOTT E. CROUTER, and DAVID R. BASSETT, JR. Pedometer Measures of Free-Living Physical Activity: Comparison of 13 Models. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 331–335, 2004.PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the step values of multiple brands of ped
Topics: Pedometer (54%)
Christopher A. Zahiri1, Thomas P. Schmalzried1, Edward S. Szuszczewicz1, Harlan C. Amstutz•Institutions (1)
01 Dec 1998-Journal of Arthroplasty
Abstract: Outcome evaluations of lower extremity joint reconstructions should include an assessment of patient activity. In vivo wear assessments of total joint prostheses should be based on a measure of use, not time in situ or a proxy such as age or gender; however, clinicians lack a simple method to reliably assess the activity of patients with joint replacement. The modern pedometer can be a satisfactory means of quantifying the use of lower extremity joints. The pedometer, however, requires special effort on the part of the physician or evaluator and the patient. Therefore, we compared the quantitative assessment of walking activity of 100 total joint replacement patients, as measured with a pedometer, to the UCLA activity score and a simple visual analog scale that can easily be employed during a routine office evaluation. Both the UCLA activity rating (P = .002) and the visual analog scale rating of the investigator (P = .00001) had a strong correlation with the average steps per day as recorded by the pedometer. There was, however, up to a 15-fold difference in the average steps per day for individual patients with the same UCLA score. The visual analog scale as rated by the patients of their own activity did not have as strong a correlation with the pedometer data (P = .08) as did patient age (P = .049). For practical reasons, the pedometer is probably best reserved for the evaluation of extreme cases of activity (or inactivity). This study indicates that both the UCLA activity rating and the investigator visual analog scale are valid for routine activity assessment in a clinical setting. Adjustments of the UCLA activity score for the frequency and intensity of activity, as can be done with the investigator visual analog scale, increase the accuracy of the activity rating.
01 Jan 2002-Sports Medicine
Abstract: Valid assessment of physical activity is important to researchers and practitioners interested in surveillance, screening, programme evaluation and intervention. The validity of an assessment instrument is commonly considered its most important attribute. Convergent validity is the extent to which an instrument’s output is associated with that of other instruments intended to measure the same exposure of interest. A systematic review of the literature produced 25 articles directly relevant to the question of convergent validity of pedometers against accelerometers, observation, and self-reported measures of physical activity. Reported correlations were pooled and a median r-value was computed. Pedometers correlate strongly (median r = 0.86) with different accelerometers (specifically uniaxial accelerometers) depending on the specific instruments used, monitoring frame and conditions implemented, and the manner in which the outputs are expressed. Pedometers also correlate strongly (median r = 0.82) with time in observed activity. Time in observed inactivity correlated negatively with pedometer outputs (median r = -0.44). The relationship with observed steps taken depended upon monitoring conditions and speed of walking. The highest agreement was apparent during ambulatory activity (running, walking) or during sitting (when both observation and pedometers would register few steps taken). There was consistent evidence of reduced accuracy during slow walking. Pedometers correlate moderately with different measures of energy expenditure (median r = 0.68). The relationship between pedometer outputs and energy expenditure is complicated by the use of many different direct and indirect measures of energy expenditure and population samples. Concordance with self-reported physical activity (median r = 0.33) varied depending upon the self-report instrument used, individuals assessed, and how pedometer outputs are expressed (e.g. steps, distance travelled, energy expenditure). Pedometer output has an inverse relationship with reported time spent sitting (r = -0.38). The accumulated evidence herein provides ample support that the simple and inexpensive pedometer is a valid option for assessing physical activity in research and practice.