User login
TOPLINE:
Apps designed to increase physical activity may be useful in increasing daily step counts for users who believe the intervention beneficial, but not for those who do not. The app’s effectiveness is notably influenced by how users perceive its utility.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial from February 2021 to May 2022 to evaluate the effectiveness of SNapp, an adaptive app designed to promote walking through tailored coaching content.
- Overall, 176 adults (76% women; mean age, 56 years) were randomly assigned to use the app plus tailored coaching content (SNapp group; n = 87) or only the step counter app (control group; n = 89).
- SNapp’s coaching content provided personalized feedback on step counts and recommendations for increasing walking, while also considering individual preferences for behavior change techniques.
- The primary outcome was the daily step count recorded by the app, which was updated on an hourly basis in a database over an intervention period of 12 months.
- Perceptions of ease of use and usefulness were assessed to determine their effect on the effectiveness of the app.
TAKEAWAY:
- Intervention group participants used the app nearly 30% of days, while those using the app alone showed almost identical use.
- The SNapp intervention did not significantly affect the step counts on average over time (B, −202.30; 95% CI, −889.7 to 485.1).
- Perceived usefulness significantly moderated the intervention effect of SNapp (B, 344.38; 90% CI, 40.4-648.3), but perceived ease of use did not (B, 38.60; 90% CI, −276.5 to 353.7).
- Among participants with a high perceived usefulness, the SNapp group had a higher median step count than the control group (median difference, 1260 steps; 90% CI, −3243.7 to 1298.2); however, this difference was not statistically significant.
IN PRACTICE:
“This study shows that perceived usefulness is also an important factor influencing behavioral effects. Hence, it is essential for apps to be perceived as useful to effectively improve users’ activity levels,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Anne L. Vos, PhD, of the Amsterdam School of Communication Research at the University of Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. It was published online on September 16, 2024, in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s recruitment strategy primarily attracted highly educated individuals, limiting generalizability. The app’s accuracy in measuring steps could be improved, as it sometimes underestimated step counts. Researchers also were unable to check if participants read messages from coaches.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the Dutch Heart Foundation and the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. No relevant conflicts of interest were disclosed by the authors.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Apps designed to increase physical activity may be useful in increasing daily step counts for users who believe the intervention beneficial, but not for those who do not. The app’s effectiveness is notably influenced by how users perceive its utility.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial from February 2021 to May 2022 to evaluate the effectiveness of SNapp, an adaptive app designed to promote walking through tailored coaching content.
- Overall, 176 adults (76% women; mean age, 56 years) were randomly assigned to use the app plus tailored coaching content (SNapp group; n = 87) or only the step counter app (control group; n = 89).
- SNapp’s coaching content provided personalized feedback on step counts and recommendations for increasing walking, while also considering individual preferences for behavior change techniques.
- The primary outcome was the daily step count recorded by the app, which was updated on an hourly basis in a database over an intervention period of 12 months.
- Perceptions of ease of use and usefulness were assessed to determine their effect on the effectiveness of the app.
TAKEAWAY:
- Intervention group participants used the app nearly 30% of days, while those using the app alone showed almost identical use.
- The SNapp intervention did not significantly affect the step counts on average over time (B, −202.30; 95% CI, −889.7 to 485.1).
- Perceived usefulness significantly moderated the intervention effect of SNapp (B, 344.38; 90% CI, 40.4-648.3), but perceived ease of use did not (B, 38.60; 90% CI, −276.5 to 353.7).
- Among participants with a high perceived usefulness, the SNapp group had a higher median step count than the control group (median difference, 1260 steps; 90% CI, −3243.7 to 1298.2); however, this difference was not statistically significant.
IN PRACTICE:
“This study shows that perceived usefulness is also an important factor influencing behavioral effects. Hence, it is essential for apps to be perceived as useful to effectively improve users’ activity levels,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Anne L. Vos, PhD, of the Amsterdam School of Communication Research at the University of Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. It was published online on September 16, 2024, in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s recruitment strategy primarily attracted highly educated individuals, limiting generalizability. The app’s accuracy in measuring steps could be improved, as it sometimes underestimated step counts. Researchers also were unable to check if participants read messages from coaches.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the Dutch Heart Foundation and the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. No relevant conflicts of interest were disclosed by the authors.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Apps designed to increase physical activity may be useful in increasing daily step counts for users who believe the intervention beneficial, but not for those who do not. The app’s effectiveness is notably influenced by how users perceive its utility.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial from February 2021 to May 2022 to evaluate the effectiveness of SNapp, an adaptive app designed to promote walking through tailored coaching content.
- Overall, 176 adults (76% women; mean age, 56 years) were randomly assigned to use the app plus tailored coaching content (SNapp group; n = 87) or only the step counter app (control group; n = 89).
- SNapp’s coaching content provided personalized feedback on step counts and recommendations for increasing walking, while also considering individual preferences for behavior change techniques.
- The primary outcome was the daily step count recorded by the app, which was updated on an hourly basis in a database over an intervention period of 12 months.
- Perceptions of ease of use and usefulness were assessed to determine their effect on the effectiveness of the app.
TAKEAWAY:
- Intervention group participants used the app nearly 30% of days, while those using the app alone showed almost identical use.
- The SNapp intervention did not significantly affect the step counts on average over time (B, −202.30; 95% CI, −889.7 to 485.1).
- Perceived usefulness significantly moderated the intervention effect of SNapp (B, 344.38; 90% CI, 40.4-648.3), but perceived ease of use did not (B, 38.60; 90% CI, −276.5 to 353.7).
- Among participants with a high perceived usefulness, the SNapp group had a higher median step count than the control group (median difference, 1260 steps; 90% CI, −3243.7 to 1298.2); however, this difference was not statistically significant.
IN PRACTICE:
“This study shows that perceived usefulness is also an important factor influencing behavioral effects. Hence, it is essential for apps to be perceived as useful to effectively improve users’ activity levels,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Anne L. Vos, PhD, of the Amsterdam School of Communication Research at the University of Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. It was published online on September 16, 2024, in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s recruitment strategy primarily attracted highly educated individuals, limiting generalizability. The app’s accuracy in measuring steps could be improved, as it sometimes underestimated step counts. Researchers also were unable to check if participants read messages from coaches.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by grants from the Dutch Heart Foundation and the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. No relevant conflicts of interest were disclosed by the authors.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.