Step counter use in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Step counter use in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
复制标题
2型糖尿病中的步骤计数器使用：随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
DOI：
10.1186/1741-7015-12-36
复制
发表时间：
2014-02-27
期刊：
影响因子：
9.3
通讯作者：
Sun Z
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Qiu S;Cai X;Chen X;Yang B;Sun Z
虽然阶梯计数器的使用在2型糖尿病(T2D)患者中很受欢迎，但其在增加体力活动(PA)和改善血糖控制方面的有效性尚不清楚。这项随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析的目的是评估在T2D患者中使用分步计数器与PA和血糖控制之间的关系。检索PubMed、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆1994年1月至2013年6月的文章。如果他们评估了阶跃计数器作为T2D患者激励和监测工具的有效性，并报告了每日步数(Steps/d)或糖化血红蛋白A1c(HbA1c)的变化，则纳入了英语RCT。数据由两位作者独立收集，总体估计采用随机效应模型。在检索到的551篇文章中，包括11篇随机对照试验。在T2D患者中，使用阶跃计数器显著增加了1,822步/d的PA(7项研究，861名参与者；95%可信区间：751步/d至2,894步/d)。使用有PA目标的步数计数器显示PA(加权平均差3,200步/d，95%CI：2,053至4,347步/d)比不使用(WMD598步/d，95%CI：−65至1,260步/d)有更大的增加。进一步的亚组分析表明，使用阶跃计数器和自我设定的PA目标(WMD 2,816步/d，95%CI：1,288到4,344步/d)在增加PA方面没有差异，而10,000步/d的目标(WMD 3,820步/d，95%CI：2,702到4,938步/d)。然而，使用分级计数器(10项研究，1,423名参与者；WMD0.02%，95%CI：−0.08%至0.13%)、使用(WMD0.04%，95%CI：−0.21%至0.30%)或不使用PA目标(WMD0.01%，95%CI：−0.10%至0.13%)均未观察到显著的HbA1c变化。在T2D患者中，阶梯计数器的使用与PA显著增加有关。然而，关于其改善血糖控制效果的证据仍然不足。PROSPERO CRD42013005236
While step counter use has become popular among type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients, its effectiveness in increasing physical activity (PA) and improving glycemic control has been poorly defined. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to evaluate the association of step counter use with PA and glycemic control in T2D patients. Articles were identified by searches of PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from January 1994 to June 2013. RCTs in the English language were included, if they had assessed the effectiveness of step counters as motivating and monitoring tools in T2D patients, with reported changes in steps per day (steps/d) or glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), or both. Data were independently collected by 2 authors and overall estimates were made by a random-effects model. Of the 551 articles retrieved, 11 RCTs were included. Step counter use significantly increased PA by 1,822 steps/d (7 studies, 861 participants; 95% confidence interval (CI): 751 to 2,894 steps/d) in patients with T2D. Step counter use with a PA goal showed a bigger increase in PA (weighted mean difference (WMD) 3,200 steps/d, 95% CI: 2,053 to 4,347 steps/d) than without (WMD 598 steps/d, 95% CI: −65 to 1,260 steps/d). Further subgroup analysis suggested step counter use with a self-set PA goal (WMD 2,816 steps/d, 95% CI: 1,288 to 4,344 steps/d) made no difference in increasing PA from a 10,000 steps/d goal (WMD 3,820 steps/d, 95% CI: 2,702 to 4,938 steps/d). However, no significant HbA1c change was observed by step counter use (10 studies, 1,423 participants; WMD 0.02%, 95% CI: −0.08% to 0.13%), either with (WMD 0.04%, 95% CI: −0.21% to 0.30%) or without a PA goal (WMD 0.01%, 95% CI: −0.10% to 0.13%). Step counter use is associated with a significant increase in PA in patients with T2D. However, evidence regarding its effect in improving glycemic control remains insufficient. PROSPERO CRD42013005236
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
15.8
作者：
Moher D;Liberati A;Tetzlaff J;Altman DG;PRISMA Group
通讯作者：
PRISMA Group
影响因子：
3
作者：
Piette, John D.;Richardson, Caroline;Valenstein, Marcia
通讯作者：
Valenstein, Marcia
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Bjorgaas, Marit R.;Vik, John T.;Grill, Valdemar
通讯作者：
Grill, Valdemar
影响因子：
16.2
作者：
McAuley, Paul A.;Myers, Jonathan N.;Froelicher, Victor F.
通讯作者：
Froelicher, Victor F.
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Allen, Nancy A.;Fain, James A.;Chipkin, Stuart R.
通讯作者：
Chipkin, Stuart R.