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
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Jan 31;49(2):97-105.
doi: 10.2340/16501977-2195.

Effectiveness of technology-based distance interventions promoting physical activity: Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

Sanna Hakala  1 , Aki Rintala, Jaakko Immonen, Juha Karvanen, Ari Heinonen, Tuulikki Sjögren
Affiliations
Free article
Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of technology-based distance interventions promoting physical activity: Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

Sanna Hakala et al. J Rehabil Med. .
Free article

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of technology-based distance interventions for promoting physical activity, using systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A literature search of studies published between 2000 and 2015 was conducted in the following databases: CENTRAL, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, OTseeker, WOS and PEDro. Studies were selected according to the PICOS framework, as follows: P (population): adults; I (intervention): technology-based distance intervention for promoting physical activity; C (comparison) similar distance intervention without technology, O (outcomes) physical activity; S (study design) randomized controlled trial. Physical activity outcomes were extracted and quality was assessed by 2 independent authors.

Results: Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. The mean (standard deviation; range) me thodological quality score of the studies was 6 (1.3; 4-8). Technology-based distance interventions were not more or less effective than conventional treatment whether measured as steps/day (mean difference 1,657; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -1,861 to 5,176, p = 0.18), physical activity min/week (mean difference 0.34; 95% CI -146.3 to 146.9, p = 0.92), or as overall physical activity (response ratio 1.1; 95% CI 0.8-1.4, p = 0.65). No associations between the intervention duration or study quality and physical activity outcomes were found. Data were statistically and clinically heterogeneous.

Conclusion: The effectiveness of technology-based distance interventions for promoting physical activity is similar to that of conventional treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer