There was no significant between group difference in six-minute walk test distance .
Conclusions Our meta- analysis showed WPAM with exercise prescription or advice are superior to no device in improving CRF in the maintenance phase of CR and no cardiac adverse events were reported with WPAM use .
Our qualitative analysis showed evidence in favour of WPAM with exercise prescription or advice for both CRF and step count .
WPAM with exercise prescription or advice did not change sedentary time .
Background Physical activity ( PA ) is a component of cardiac rehabilitation ( CR ) .
However , life-long engagement in PA is required to maintain benefits gained .
Wearable PA monitoring devices ( WPAM ) are thought to increase PA .
There appear to be no review s which investigate the effect of WPAM in cardiac population s. We firstly aim ed to systematic ally review r and omised controlled trials within the cardiac population that investigated the effect WPAM had through the maintenance phase of CR .
We specifically examined the effect on cardiorespiratory fitness ( CRF ) , amount and intensity of daily PA , and sedentary time .
The influence of a consumer-wearable activity tracker on sedentary time and prolonged sedentary bouts: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial
Objective A recent meta- analysis surmised pedometers were a useful panacea to independently reduce sedentary time ( ST ) . To further test and exp and on this deduction , we analyzed the ability of a consumer-wearable activity tracker to reduce ST and prolonged sedentary bouts ( PSB ) . We originally conducted a 12-month r and omized control trial where 800 employees from 13 organizations were assigned to control , activity tracker  , or one of two activity tracker plus incentive groups design ed to increase step count . The primary outcome was accelerometer measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity . Results We conducted a secondary analysis on accelerometer measured daily ST and PSB bouts . A general linear mixed model was used to examine changes in ST and prolonged sedentary bouts , followed by between-group pairwise comparisons . Regression analyses were conducted to examine the association of changes in step counts with ST and PSB . The changes in ST and PSB were not statistically significant and not different between the groups ( P < 0.05 ) . Increases in step counts were concomitantly associated with decreases in ST and PSB , regardless of intervention ( P < 0.05 ) . Caution should be taken when considering consumer-wearable activity trackers as a means to reduce sedentary behavior . Trial registration NCT01855776 Registered : August 8 ,
There was no significant between group difference in six-minute walk test distance .
Conclusions Our meta- analysis showed WPAM with exercise prescription or advice are superior to no device in improving CRF in the maintenance phase of CR and no cardiac adverse events were reported with WPAM use .
Our qualitative analysis showed evidence in favour of WPAM with exercise prescription or advice for both CRF and step count .
WPAM with exercise prescription or advice did not change sedentary time .
Background Physical activity ( PA ) is a component of cardiac rehabilitation ( CR ) .
However , life-long engagement in PA is required to maintain benefits gained .
Wearable PA monitoring devices ( WPAM ) are thought to increase PA .
There appear to be no review s which investigate the effect of WPAM in cardiac population s. We firstly aim ed to systematic ally review r and omised controlled trials within the cardiac population that investigated the effect WPAM had through the maintenance phase of CR .
We specifically examined the effect on cardiorespiratory fitness ( CRF ) , amount and intensity of daily PA , and sedentary time .