Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Jul 24;17(7):e184.
doi: 10.2196/jmir.4579.

It's LiFe! Mobile and Web-Based Monitoring and Feedback Tool Embedded in Primary Care Increases Physical Activity: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Sanne van der Weegen  1 , Renée Verwey, Marieke Spreeuwenberg, Huibert Tange, Trudy van der Weijden, Luc de Witte
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

It's LiFe! Mobile and Web-Based Monitoring and Feedback Tool Embedded in Primary Care Increases Physical Activity: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Sanne van der Weegen et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Physical inactivity is a major public health problem. The It's LiFe! monitoring and feedback tool embedded in the Self-Management Support Program (SSP) is an attempt to stimulate physical activity in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or type 2 diabetes treated in primary care.

Objective: Our aim was to evaluate whether the SSP combined with the use of the monitoring and feedback tool leads to more physical activity compared to usual care and to evaluate the additional effect of using this tool on top of the SSP.

Methods: This was a three-armed cluster randomised controlled trial. Twenty four family practices were randomly assigned to one of three groups in which participants received the tool + SSP (group 1), the SSP (group 2), or care as usual (group 3). The primary outcome measure was minutes of physical activity per day. The secondary outcomes were general and exercise self-efficacy and quality of life. Outcomes were measured at baseline after the intervention (4-6 months), and 3 months thereafter.

Results: The group that received the entire intervention (tool + SSP) showed more physical activity directly after the intervention than Group 3 (mean difference 11.73, 95% CI 6.21-17.25; P<.001), and Group 2 (mean difference 7.86, 95% CI 2.18-13.54; P=.003). Three months after the intervention, this effect was still present and significant (compared to Group 3: mean difference 10.59, 95% CI 4.94-16.25; P<.001; compared to Group 2: mean difference 9.41, 95% CI 3.70-15.11; P<.001). There was no significant difference in effect between Groups 2 and 3 on both time points. There was no interaction effect for disease type.

Conclusions: The combination of counseling with the tool proved an effective way to stimulate physical activity. Counseling without the tool was not effective. Future research about the cost-effectiveness and application under more tailored conditions and in other target groups is recommended.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01867970, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01867970 (archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6a2qR5BSr).

Keywords: COPD; behavior change; motor activity; primary care nursing; remote sensing technology; self-management support; type 2 diabetes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: A grant from ZonMw and from Insurance Company CZ was received during the conduct of the study.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Course of the It's LiFe! interventions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The It's LiFe! activity monitor and mobile phone app.
Figure 3
Figure 3
It's LiFe! CONSORT flow diagram.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lee I, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT, Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet. 2012 Jul 21;380(9838):219–29. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61031-9. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/22818936 S0140-6736(12)61031-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Blair SN. Physical inactivity: the biggest public health problem of the 21st century. Br J Sports Med. 2009 Jan;43(1):1–2.43/1/1 - PubMed
    1. Warburton DER, Nicol CW, Bredin SSD. Health benefits of physical activity: the evidence. CMAJ. 2006 Mar 14;174(6):801–9. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.051351. http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=16534088 174/6/801 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC, Guthold R, Haskell W, Ekelund U, Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet. 2012 Jul 21;380(9838):247–57. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60646-1.S0140-6736(12)60646-1 - DOI - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. [2015-04-15]. Physical Inactivity: A Global Public Health Problem http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_inactivity/en/

Publication types

Associated data