Promoting walking with pedometers in the community - The step-by-step trial
Promoting walking with pedometers in the community - The step-by-step trial
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.amepre.2006.12.007
复制
发表时间：
2007-04-01
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
Bauman, Adrian E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Merom, Dafna;Rissel, Chris;Bauman, Adrian E.
背景资料：计步器已被确定为一个潜在的动机援助，增加体力活动，但其疗效尚未被证明在以社区为基础的，非临床sample.Design：一个随机对照试验进行了2005年8月至12月。分析于2006年6月完成。设置/参与者：从社区招募的30-65岁的不活跃成年人（n=369）。干预：比较基于理论的自助步行计划（WP）和每周日记（通过邮件发送）;使用计步器（WPP）的相同步行程序（也通过邮件）;和不治疗对照组（C）。在过去3个月内，自我报告的任何运动/娱乐休闲时间的变化，以及用于锻炼、娱乐和旅行的多功能步行（APW），以及其他中度，在过去的一周里进行了大量的体育活动。会议的比例体力活动的建议（等于或大于150分钟，等于或大于五届/week（-1））determined.Results：3个月的后续interview进行了314（85%）的参与者。意向性治疗分析表明组内APW和休闲时间步行（LTW）显著增加，但WPP组的平均和中位数会话和分钟变化最大。常规LTW组间无显著差异（步行等于或大于5次/周（-1），每次至少30分钟），但WPP组显著增加了对其他运动/娱乐的参与，并且比对照组更有可能满足所有休闲时间体力活动的体力活动建议（校正比值比=2.40，95% CI=01.17-4.93），APW（校正比值比=1.75，95% CI=0.92-3.34）和所有体力活动（校正比值比=1.59，95% CI=0.92-2.79）。应检验这种低成本干预措施的可持续性。
Background: Pedometers have been identified as a potential motivational aid for increasing physical activity, but their efficacy has not been demonstrated in a community-based, nonclinical sample.Design: A randomized controlled trial was conducted from August to December 2005. Analysis was completed in June 2006.Setting/Participants: Inactive adults aged 30-65 years (n=369) recruited from the community.Intervention: Comparison of a theoretically based self-help walking program (WP) and weekly diaries (sent by mail); the same walking program with a pedometer (WPP) (also by mail); and a no-treatment control group (C).Measures: Change in self-reported leisure time in any sports/recreation in the last 3 months, and all-purpose walking (APW) for exercise, recreation, and travel, and other moderate, vigorous physical activity in the last week. Proportions meeting physical activity recommendations (equal to or greater than 150 minutes and equal to or greater than five sessions/week(-1)) were determined.Results: A 3-month follow-up inter-view was conducted with 314 (85%) participants. Intention-to-treat analyses indicated significance within-group increases of APW and leisure-time walking (LTW), but mean and median sessions and minutes changes were greatest in the WPP group. There were no significant between-group differences in regular LTW (walked equal to or greater than 5 sessions/week(-1) for at least 30 minutes/session), but the WPP group increased significantly participation in other sports/recreations and was more likely than the control group to meet physical activity recommendations by all leisure-time physical activity (adjusted odds ratio=2.40, 95% CI=01.17-4.93) by APW (adjusted odds ratio=1.75 95% CI=0.92-3.34) and all physical activity (adjusted odds ratio=1.59 95% CI=0.92-2.79) in the last week.Conclusions: Pedometers enhanced the effects of the self-help walking program. This low-cost intervention should be tested for sustainability.