Patients’ experiences with commercially available activity trackers embedded in physiotherapy treatment: a qualitative study

References

• International Data Coroporation [Internet]. Wearables Aren't Dead, They're Just Shifting Focus as the Market Grows 16.9% in the Fourth Quarter, According to IDC. Framingham: International Data Coroporation; 2017 [cited 2017 Nov 17]. Available from: https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS42342317
   Google Scholar
• National Institue for Public Health and Enviroment [Internet]. Chronische ziekten en multimorbiditeit→Cijfers & Context→Huidige situatie. Bilthoven: National Institue for Public Health and Enviroment; 2017 [cited 2018 Feb 7]. Available from: https://www.volksgezondheidenzorg.info/onderwerp/chronische-ziekten-en-multimorbiditeit/cijfers-context/huidige-situatie
   Google Scholar
• C3 Collaborating for Health. The benefits of regular walking for health, well‐being and the environment. London: C3 Collaborating for Health; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Warburton DE, Nicol CW, Bredin SS. Health benefits of physical activity: a systematic review of current systematic reviews. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2006;174:801–809.
   Google Scholar
• Booth FW, Roberts CK, Laye MJ. Lack of exercise is a major cause of chronic diseases. Compr Physiol. 2012;2:1143–1211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fysionet-evidencebased [Internet]. Introduction physical activity intervention. Amersfoort: Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy, 2013 [cited 2017 Jun 7]. Available from: https://www.fysionetevidencebased.nl/images/pdfs/beweeginterventies/inleiding_bij_de_kngf-standaarden_beweeginterventies.pdf
   Google Scholar
• World Health Orginsation. Global recommendations on physical activity for health. Switzerland: World Health Orginsation; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Ainsworth B, Cahalin L, Buman M, et al. The current state of physical activity assessment tools. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;57:387–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helmerhorst HJ, Brage S, Warren J, et al. A systematic review of reliability and objective criterion-related validity of physical activity questionnaires. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9:103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan AN, Lachman ME. Behavior change with fitness technology in sedentary adults: a review of the evidence for increasing physical activity. Front Public Health. 2016;4:289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ummels D, Beekman E, Theunissen K, et al. Nine commercially available activity trackers in people with a chronic disease for activities of daily living: a cross-sectional validity study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018;6:e70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kooiman TJ, Dontje ML, Sprenger SR, et al. Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2015;7:24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson T, Rowlands AV, Olds T, et al. The validity of consumer-level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free-living conditions: a cross-sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2015;12:42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Remoortel H, Giavedoni S, Raste Y, et al. Validity of activity monitors in health and chronic disease: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9:84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein DA, Kang JH, Pina LR, et al. Reconsidering the device in the drawer: lapses as a design opportunity in personal informatics. Ubicomp; 2016 Sep 12–16; Heidelberg, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Lazar A, Koehler C, Tanenbaum J, et al. Why we use and abandon smart devices. Ubicomp; 2015 Sep 7–11; Osaka, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison D, Marshall P, Bianchi-Berthouze N, et al. Activity tracking: barriers, workarounds and customisation. Ubicomp; 2015 Sep 7–11; Osaka, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Shih PC, Han K, Poole ES, et al. Use and adoption challenges of wearable activity trackers. iConference; 2015 Mar 24–27; Newport Beach, California, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Armağan K, Çiğdem E. Design for physical activity: design aspects of wearable activity trackers. International Conference of Engineering Design; 2015 Jun 27–30; Milano, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Maher C, Ryan J, Ambrosi C, et al. Users' experiences of wearable activity trackers: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2017;15:17880.
   Google Scholar
• Hermsen S, Moons J, Kerkhof P, et al. Determinants for sustained use of an activity tracker: observational study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017;5:e164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karapanos E, Gouveia R, Hassenzahl M, et al. Wellbeing in the making: peoples' experiences with wearable activity trackers. Psychol Well Being. 2016;6:4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fausset CB, Mitzner TL, Price CE, et al. Older adults’ use of and attitudes toward activity monitoring technologies. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society; 2013 Sep 30–Oct 4; San Diego, CA, USA.
   Google Scholar
• O'Brien T, Troutman-Jordan M, Hathaway D, et al. Acceptability of wristband activity trackers among community dwelling older adults. Geriatr Nurs. 2015;36:21–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasche P, Schäfer K, Theis S, et al. Age-related usability investigation of an activity tracker. IJHFE. 2016;4:187.
   Google Scholar
• Preusse KC, Mitzner TL, Fausset CB, et al. Older adults' acceptance of activity trackers. J Appl Gerontol. 2017;36:127–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlomann A. A case study on older adults’ long-term use of an activity tracker. Gerontechnology. 2017;16:115–124.
   Google Scholar
• Puri A, Kim B, Nguyen O, et al. User acceptance of wrist-worn activity trackers among community-dwelling older adults: mixed method study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017;5:e173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer K, Giangregorio L, Schneider E, et al. Acceptance of commercially available wearable activity trackers among adults aged over 50 and with chronic illness: a mixed-methods evaluation. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4:e7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg D, Kadokura EA, Bouldin ED, et al. Acceptability of Fitbit for physical activity tracking within clinical care among men with prostate cancer. AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2016 Nov 4–8; Washington, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. USA: Sage publications; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, et al. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015;42:533–544.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beekman E, Braun SM, Ummels D, et al. Validity, reliability and feasibility of commercially available activity trackers in physical therapy for people with a chronic disease: a study protocol of a mixed methods research. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2017;3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Agusti A, Decramer M, Celli BR, et al. Pocket guide to COPD diagnosis, management and prevention. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall AL, Smith BJ, Bauman AE, et al. Reliability and validity of a brief physical activity assessment for use by family doctors. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39:294–297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linn BS, Linn MW, Gurel L. Cumulative illness rating scale. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1968;16:622–626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Groot V, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, et al. How to measure comorbidity. A critical review of available methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:221–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallio H, Pietila AM, Johnson M, et al. Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. J Adv Nurs. 2016;72:2954–2965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreuger RA, Casey MA. Focus Groups a practial guide for applied research. Vol. 5. USA: SAGE Publications; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, et al. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elo S, Kyngas H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62:107–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Bommel M, Van Gisbergen T. De eerste stap zetten. De hanteerbaarheid en toepasbaarheid van activiteitenmeters [bachelor thesis]. Heerlen (Netherlands): Zuyd University of Applied Science; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Verwey R. Get moving! Self-management support using mobile technology. A counselling protocol extended with a web-based coaching system to promote physical activity in patients with COPD or type 2 diabetes in primary care: the It’s LiFe! study [dissertation]. Maastricht: Maastricht University; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Mancuso PJ, Thompson M, Tietze M, et al. Can patient use of daily activity monitors change nurse practitioner practice? J Nurse Pract. 2014;10:787–793.
   Google Scholar
• Andrieu N, Mannens L, Nowak K. Toepasbaarheid en hanteerbaarheid van activiteitenmeters binnen de ergotherapie bij COPD-patiënten [bachelor thesis]. Heerlen (Netherlands): Zuyd University of Applied Science; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Lyons EJ, Lewis ZH, Mayrsohn BG, et al. Behavior change techniques implemented in electronic lifestyle activity monitors: a systematic content analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16:e192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens A, Beurskens A, Koke A, et al. The use of patient-specific measurement instruments in the process of goal-setting: a systematic review of available instruments and their feasibility. Clin Rehabil. 2013;27:1005–1019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar