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
. 2022 Jul;32(7):1076-1088.
doi: 10.1111/sms.14155. Epub 2022 Mar 23.

Systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effects electric bikes have on physiological parameters

Jenna McVicar  1 , Michelle A Keske  1 , Reza Daryabeygi-Khotbehsara  1 , Andrew C Betik  1 , Lewan Parker  1 , Ralph Maddison  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effects electric bikes have on physiological parameters

Jenna McVicar et al. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2022 Jul.

Abstract

Background: There is a universal need to increase the number of adults meeting physical activity (PA) recommendations to help improve health. In recent years, electrically assisted bicycles (e-bikes) have emerged as a promising method for supporting people to initiate and maintain physical activity levels. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no meta-analyses conducted to quantify the difference in physiological responses between e-cycling with electrical assistance, e-cycling without assistance, conventional cycling, and walking.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We identified short-term e-bike studies, which utilized a crossover design comparing physiological outcomes when e-cycling with electrical assistance, e-cycling without electrical assistance, conventional cycling, or walking. Energy expenditure (EE), heart rate (HR), oxygen consumption (VO2 ), power output (PO), and metabolic equivalents (METs) outcomes were included within the meta-analysis.

Results: Fourteen studies met our inclusion criteria (N = 239). E-cycling with electrical assistance resulted in a lower energy expenditure (EE) [SMD = -0.46 (-0.98, 0.06), p = 0.08], heart rate (HR) [MD = -11.41 (-17.15, -5.68), p < 0.000, beats per minute], oxygen uptake (VO2 ) [SMD = -0.57 (-0.96, -0.17), p = 0.005], power output (PO) [MD = -31.19 (-47.19 to -15.18), p = 0.000, Watts], and metabolic equivalent (MET) response [MD = -0.83 (-1.52, -0.14), p = 0.02, METs], compared with conventional cycling. E-cycling with moderate electrical assistance resulted in a greater HR response [MD 10.38 (-1.48, 22.23) p = 0.09, beats per minute], and VO2 response [SMD 0.34 (-0.14, 0.82) p = 0.16] compared with walking.

Conclusions: E-cycling was associated with increased physiological responses that can confer health benefits.

Keywords: Physical activity; electric bike; energy expenditure; heart rate; human physiology; metabolic equivalents; oxygen uptake; power output.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Forest plot showing the standardized mean difference in energy expenditure response when using an e‐bike with moderate electrical assistance v conventional bike
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Forest plot showing mean difference in heart rate data for e‐bike with moderate electrical assistance v conventional bike
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Forest plot showing oxygen uptake data for e‐bike with moderate electrical assistance v conventional bike
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Forest plot showing mean difference in power output data for e‐bike with moderate electrical assistance v conventional bike
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Forest plot showing mean difference in metabolic equivalent data for e‐bike with moderate electrical assistance v conventional bike
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Caprara G. Mediterranean‐type dietary pattern and physical activity: the winning combination to counteract the rising burden of non‐communicable diseases (NCDs). Nutrients. 2021;13(2):429. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bull FC, Al‐Ansari SS, Biddle S, et al. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(24):1451‐1462. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ding D, Lawson KD, Kolbe‐Alexander TL, et al. The economic burden of physical inactivity: a global analysis of major non‐communicable diseases. Lancet. 2016;388(10051):1311‐1324. - PubMed
    1. Hoare E, Stavreski B, Jennings GL, Kingwell BA. Exploring motivation and barriers to physical activity among active and inactive Australian adults. Sports. 2017;5(3):47. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shaw C, Keall M, Guiney H. What modes of transport are associated with higher levels of physical activity? Cross‐sectional study of New Zealand adults. Journal of Transport & Health. 2017;7:125‐133. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2017.09.010 - DOI