PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Objective monitoring of self-directed physical activity (PA) is a common approach used in both fitness and health settings to promote exercise behavior, but adherence has been poor. Newer mobile health (mHealth) technologies could be a cost-effective approach to broadening accessibility and providing support for PA behavior change; yet, the optimal method of delivery of such interventions is still unclear.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of an mHealth exercise intervention delivered in combination with objective monitoring in 3 ways: health education emails, asynchronous exercise videos, or synchronous videoconference exercise classes.
METHODS: Physically inactive (<30 min/wk) adults (cisgender women aged 31.5, SD 11.3 years, cisgender men aged 34.1, SD 28.9 years, and nonbinary individuals aged 22.0, SD 0 years) were randomized (1:1:1) to 8 weeks of increasing PA behavioral support: level 1 (health education+objective monitoring, n=26), level 2 (asynchronous contact, level 1+prerecorded exercise videos, n=30), or level 3 (synchronous contact, level 1+videoconference group exercise, n=28). Participants used a heart rate monitor during exercise and a mobile app for interaction. Primary outcomes were feasibility (accrual, retention, and adherence) and acceptability (user experience survey). Secondary outcomes assessed at baseline and 8 weeks included resting heart rate, self-reported PA, and quality of life. The exercise dose was evaluated throughout the intervention.
RESULTS: Between August 2020 and August 2021, 204 adults were screened for eligibility. Out of 135 eligible participants, 84 (62%) enrolled in the study. Retention was 50% (13/26) in level 1, 60% (18/30) in level 2 and 82% (23/28) in level 3, while adherence was 31% (8/26) in level 1, 40% (12/30) in level 2 and 75% (21/28) in level 3. A total of 83% (70/84) of the study sample completed the intervention, but low response rates (64%, 54/84) were observed postintervention at week-8 assessments. Program satisfaction was highest in participants receiving exercise videos (level 2, 80%, 8/10) or exercise classes (level 3, 80%, 12/15), while only 63% (5/8) of level 1 reported the program as enjoyable. Level 3 was most likely to recommend the program (87%, 13/15), compared to 80% (8/10) in level 2 and 46% (5/8) in level 1. Self-reported PA significantly increased from baseline to intervention in level 3 (P<.001) and level 2 (P=.003), with no change in level 1. Level 3 appeared to exercise at higher doses throughout the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Only the videoconference exercise class intervention met feasibility criteria, although postintervention response rates were low across all groups. Both videoconference and prerecorded videos had good acceptability, while objective monitoring and health education alone were not feasible or acceptable. Future studies are needed to examine the effectiveness of videoconference exercise interventions on health-related outcomes during nonpandemic times and how asynchronous interventions might maximize adherence.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05192421; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05192421.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of an mHealth exercise intervention delivered in combination with objective monitoring in 3 ways: health education emails, asynchronous exercise videos, or synchronous videoconference exercise classes.
METHODS: Physically inactive (<30 min/wk) adults (cisgender women aged 31.5, SD 11.3 years, cisgender men aged 34.1, SD 28.9 years, and nonbinary individuals aged 22.0, SD 0 years) were randomized (1:1:1) to 8 weeks of increasing PA behavioral support: level 1 (health education+objective monitoring, n=26), level 2 (asynchronous contact, level 1+prerecorded exercise videos, n=30), or level 3 (synchronous contact, level 1+videoconference group exercise, n=28). Participants used a heart rate monitor during exercise and a mobile app for interaction. Primary outcomes were feasibility (accrual, retention, and adherence) and acceptability (user experience survey). Secondary outcomes assessed at baseline and 8 weeks included resting heart rate, self-reported PA, and quality of life. The exercise dose was evaluated throughout the intervention.
RESULTS: Between August 2020 and August 2021, 204 adults were screened for eligibility. Out of 135 eligible participants, 84 (62%) enrolled in the study. Retention was 50% (13/26) in level 1, 60% (18/30) in level 2 and 82% (23/28) in level 3, while adherence was 31% (8/26) in level 1, 40% (12/30) in level 2 and 75% (21/28) in level 3. A total of 83% (70/84) of the study sample completed the intervention, but low response rates (64%, 54/84) were observed postintervention at week-8 assessments. Program satisfaction was highest in participants receiving exercise videos (level 2, 80%, 8/10) or exercise classes (level 3, 80%, 12/15), while only 63% (5/8) of level 1 reported the program as enjoyable. Level 3 was most likely to recommend the program (87%, 13/15), compared to 80% (8/10) in level 2 and 46% (5/8) in level 1. Self-reported PA significantly increased from baseline to intervention in level 3 (P<.001) and level 2 (P=.003), with no change in level 1. Level 3 appeared to exercise at higher doses throughout the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Only the videoconference exercise class intervention met feasibility criteria, although postintervention response rates were low across all groups. Both videoconference and prerecorded videos had good acceptability, while objective monitoring and health education alone were not feasible or acceptable. Future studies are needed to examine the effectiveness of videoconference exercise interventions on health-related outcomes during nonpandemic times and how asynchronous interventions might maximize adherence.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05192421; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05192421.
摘要：
背景：对自我指导的身体活动（PA）进行客观监测是在健身和健康环境中用于促进运动行为的常用方法，但是依从性很差。较新的移动健康（mHealth）技术可能是一种具有成本效益的方法，可以扩大可达性并为PA行为改变提供支持；然而，此类干预措施的最佳实施方法仍不清楚.
目的：本研究旨在通过3种方式确定mHealth运动干预与客观监测相结合的可行性和可接受性：健康教育电子邮件，异步运动视频，或同步视频会议练习类。
方法：身体不活动（<30分钟/周）的成年人（31.5岁的顺性女性，SD11.3岁，顺性男性34.1岁，SD28.9岁，和年龄为22.0，SD0岁的非二元个体）随机（1：1：1）至8周增加PA行为支持：1级（健康教育客观监测，n=26),2级(异步接触，1级+预录的运动视频，n=30),或3级(同步接触，一级+视频会议小组练习，n=28）。参与者在运动期间使用心率监测器和移动应用程序进行互动。主要结果是可行性(应计，保留,和依从性)和可接受性(用户体验调查)。在基线和8周时评估的次要结果包括静息心率，自我报告PA，和生活质量。在整个干预期间评估运动剂量。
结果：在2020年8月至2021年8月期间，对204名成年人进行了资格筛选。在135名符合条件的参与者中，84人（62%）参加了研究。1级保留率为50%(13/26),2级保留率为60%(18/30),3级保留率为82%(23/28),1级保留率为31%(8/26),2级保留率为40%(12/30),3级保留率为75%(21/28)。总共83%(70/84)的研究样本完成了干预，但反应率低(64%，54/84）在第8周评估后观察到。接受运动视频的参与者的项目满意度最高(2级，80%，8/10）或运动课程（3级，80％，12/15),而只有63%（5/8）的1级报告的程序是令人愉快的。3级最有可能推荐该程序（87％，13/15),与第2级的80%(8/10)和第1级的46%(5/8)相比。自我报告的PA在3级（P<.001）和2级（P=.003）中从基线到干预显着增加，在1级没有变化。在整个干预过程中，3级似乎以较高的剂量运动。
结论：只有视频会议运动类干预符合可行性标准，尽管所有组的干预后反应率都很低.视频会议和预先录制的视频都有很好的可接受性，而单纯的客观监测和健康教育是不可行或不可接受的.需要进行未来的研究，以检查在非大流行时期视频会议运动干预对健康相关结果的有效性，以及异步干预如何最大程度地提高依从性。
背景：ClinicalTrials.govNCT05192421;https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05192421。
目的：本研究旨在通过3种方式确定mHealth运动干预与客观监测相结合的可行性和可接受性：健康教育电子邮件，异步运动视频，或同步视频会议练习类。
方法：身体不活动（<30分钟/周）的成年人（31.5岁的顺性女性，SD11.3岁，顺性男性34.1岁，SD28.9岁，和年龄为22.0，SD0岁的非二元个体）随机（1：1：1）至8周增加PA行为支持：1级（健康教育客观监测，n=26),2级(异步接触，1级+预录的运动视频，n=30),或3级(同步接触，一级+视频会议小组练习，n=28）。参与者在运动期间使用心率监测器和移动应用程序进行互动。主要结果是可行性(应计，保留,和依从性)和可接受性(用户体验调查)。在基线和8周时评估的次要结果包括静息心率，自我报告PA，和生活质量。在整个干预期间评估运动剂量。
结果：在2020年8月至2021年8月期间，对204名成年人进行了资格筛选。在135名符合条件的参与者中，84人（62%）参加了研究。1级保留率为50%(13/26),2级保留率为60%(18/30),3级保留率为82%(23/28),1级保留率为31%(8/26),2级保留率为40%(12/30),3级保留率为75%(21/28)。总共83%(70/84)的研究样本完成了干预，但反应率低(64%，54/84）在第8周评估后观察到。接受运动视频的参与者的项目满意度最高(2级，80%，8/10）或运动课程（3级，80％，12/15),而只有63%（5/8）的1级报告的程序是令人愉快的。3级最有可能推荐该程序（87％，13/15),与第2级的80%(8/10)和第1级的46%(5/8)相比。自我报告的PA在3级（P<.001）和2级（P=.003）中从基线到干预显着增加，在1级没有变化。在整个干预过程中，3级似乎以较高的剂量运动。
结论：只有视频会议运动类干预符合可行性标准，尽管所有组的干预后反应率都很低.视频会议和预先录制的视频都有很好的可接受性，而单纯的客观监测和健康教育是不可行或不可接受的.需要进行未来的研究，以检查在非大流行时期视频会议运动干预对健康相关结果的有效性，以及异步干预如何最大程度地提高依从性。
背景：ClinicalTrials.govNCT05192421;https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05192421。
