Dataset Information

Use of the Healthy Lifestyle Coaching Chatbot App to Promote Stair-Climbing Habits Among Office Workers: Exploratory Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Lack of time for exercise is common among office workers given their busy lives. Because of occupational restrictions and difficulty in taking time off, it is necessary to suggest effective ways for workers to exercise regularly. Sustaining lifestyle habits that increase nonexercise activity in daily life can solve the issue of lack of exercise time. Healthy Lifestyle Coaching Chatbot is a messenger app based on the habit formation model that can be used as a tool to provide a health behavior intervention that emphasizes the importance of sustainability and involvement.

Objective

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of the Healthy Lifestyle Coaching Chatbot intervention presented via a messenger app aimed at stair-climbing habit formation for office workers.

Methods

From February 1, 2018, to April 30, 2018, a total of 106 people participated in the trial after online recruitment. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=57) or the control group (n=49). The intervention group received cues and intrinsic and extrinsic rewards for the entire 12 weeks. However, the control group did not receive intrinsic rewards for the first 4 weeks and only received all rewards as in the intervention group from the fifth to twelfth week. The Self-Report Habit Index (SRHI) of participants was evaluated every week, and the level of physical activity was measured at the beginning and end of the trial. SPSS Statistics version 21 (IBM Corp) was used for statistical analysis.

Results

After 4 weeks of intervention without providing the intrinsic rewards in the control group, the change in SRHI scores was 13.54 (SD 14.99) in the intervention group and 6.42 (SD 9.42) in the control group, indicating a significant difference between the groups (P=.04). When all rewards were given to both groups, from the fifth to twelfth week, the change in SRHI scores of the intervention and control groups was comparable at 12.08 (SD 10.87) and 15.88 (SD 13.29), respectively (P=.21). However, the level of physical activity showed a significant difference between the groups after 12 weeks of intervention (P=.045).

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that intrinsic rewards are important to enhance the sustainability and effectiveness of an intervention. The Healthy Lifestyle Coaching Chatbot program can be a cost-effective method for healthy habit formation.

Trial registration

Clinical Research Information Service KCT0004009; https://tinyurl.com/w4oo7md.

SUBMITTER: Piao M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7267999 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mobile health (mHealth) approaches are growing in popularity as a means of addressing low levels of physical activity (PA). OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to determine the validity of wearables in measuring step count and floor count per day and assess the feasibility and effects of a 6-week team challenge intervention delivered through smartphone apps. METHODS:Staff and students from a public university were recruited between 2015 and 2016. In phase 1, everyone wore a Fitbit tracker (Charge or Charge HR) and an ActiGraph for 7 days to compare daily step count estimated by the two devices under free-living conditions. They were also asked to climb 4 bouts of floors in an indoor stairwell to measure floor count which was compared against direct observation. In phase 2, participants were allocated to either a control or intervention group and received a Fitbit tracker synced to the Fitbit app. Furthermore, the intervention group participants were randomized to 4 teams and competed in 6 weekly (Monday to Friday) real-time challenges. A valid day was defined as having 1500 steps or more per day. The outcomes were as follows: (1) adherence to wearing the Fitbit (ie, number of days in which all participants in each group were classified as valid users aggregated across the entire study period), (2) mean proportion of valid participants over the study period, and (3) the effects of the intervention on step count and floor count determined using multiple linear regression models and generalized estimating equations (GEEs) for longitudinal data analysis. RESULTS:In phase 1, 32 of 40 eligible participants provided valid step count data, whereas all 40 participants provided valid floor count data. The Fitbit trackers demonstrated high correlations (step count: Spearman ?=0.89; P<.001; floor count: Spearman ?=0.98; P<.001). The trackers overestimated step count (median absolute error: 17%) but accurately estimated floor count. In phase 2, 20 participants each were allocated to an intervention or control group. Overall, 24 participants provided complete covariates and valid PA data for analyses. Multiple linear regressions revealed that the average daily steps was 15.9% higher for the intervention group (95% CI -8.9 to 47.6; P=.21) during the final two intervention weeks; the average daily floors climbed was 39.4% higher (95% CI 2.4 to 89.7; P=.04). GEE results indicated no significant interaction effects between groups and the intervention week for weekly step count, whereas a significant effect (P<.001) was observed for weekly floor count. CONCLUSIONS:The consumer wearables used in this study provided acceptable validity in estimating stepping and stair climbing activities, and the mHealth-based team challenge interventions were feasible. Compared with the control group, the participants in the intervention group climbed more stairs, so this can be introduced as an additional PA promotion target in the context of mHealth strategies. Methodologically rigorous studies are warranted to further strengthen this study's findings.

Project description:BackgroundRegular stair climbing has the potential to lower the risk of premature death, but current evidence is scarce. We aimed to examine whether daily stair climbing is associated with lower risk of all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality.MethodsUsing the UK Biobank cohort, we extracted information of self-reported daily flights of stairs climbed at home, categorized as none, 1 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 15, and ≥16 flights per day. Associations between flights of stair climbed per day and mortality were examined as hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for demographic, clinical, and behavioural covariates including time spent in other physical activities. We calculated the restricted mean survival time as an absolute measure of association. The risk of residual confounding was examined using propensity score matching and by using lung cancer as negative control outcome. Participants were followed from baseline (2006-2010) through 31 March 2020.ResultsA total of 280 423 participants (median follow-up 11.1 years, during which 9445 deaths occurred) were included. Compared with not climbing any stairs, climbing more than five flights of stairs at home per day was associated with lower risk of premature mortality. The lowest risk was found for those climbing 6-10 flights per day: 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85, 0.98, translated to approximately 44 to 55 days of additional survival. A similar pattern was found after applying propensity score matching and for cancer mortality (6-10 flights per day HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.80, 0.97), but not for CVD mortality (6-10 flights per day HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.29). The association between stair climbing and lung cancer was similar to that of all-cause mortality.ConclusionsClimbing more than five flights of stairs at home per day was associated with a lower risk of all-cause and cancer mortality, but not CVD mortality, compared with those who did not take the stairs. The magnitude of the association was small and appeared susceptible to residual confounding. It is unlikely that at-home stair climbing is sufficient physical activity stimuli to lower the risk of premature mortality.

Project description:BackgroundMetabolic disorders are established precursors to cardiovascular diseases, yet they can be readily prevented with sustained lifestyle modifications.ObjectiveWe assessed the effectiveness of a smartphone-based weight management app on metabolic parameters in adults at high-risk, yet without physician diagnosis nor pharmacological treatment for metabolic syndrome, in a community setting.MethodsIn this 3-arm parallel-group, single-blind, randomized controlled trial, we recruited participants aged 30 to 59 years with at least 2 conditions defined by the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program expert panel (abdominal obesity, high blood pressure, high triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high fasting glucose level). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by block randomization to either the nonuser group (control), the app-based diet and exercise self-logging group (app only), or the app-based self-logging and personalized coaching from professional dieticians and exercise coordinators group (app with personalized coaching). Assessments were performed at baseline, week 6, week 12, and week 24. The primary outcome was change in systolic blood pressure (between baseline and follow-up assessments). Secondary outcomes were changes in diastolic blood pressure, body weight, body fat mass, waist circumference, homeostatic model of assessment of insulin resistance, triglyceride level, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level between baseline and follow-up assessments. Analysis was performed using intention-to-treat.ResultsBetween October 28, 2017 and May 28, 2018, 160 participants participated in the baseline screening examination. Participants (129/160, 80.6%) who satisfied the eligibility criteria were assigned to control (n=41), app only (n=45), or app with personalized coaching (n=43) group. In each group, systolic blood pressure showed decreasing trends from baseline (control: mean -10.95, SD 2.09 mmHg; app only: mean -7.29, SD 1.83 mmHg; app with personalized coaching: mean -7.19, SD 1.66 mmHg), yet without significant difference among the groups (app only: P=.19; app with personalized coaching: P=.16). Instead, those in the app with personalized coaching group had greater body weight reductions (control: mean -0.12, SD 0.30 kg; app only: mean -0.35, SD 0.36 kg, P=.67; app with personalized coaching: mean -0.96, SD 0.37 kg; P=.08), specifically by body fat mass reduction (control: mean -0.13, SD 0.34 kg; app only: mean -0.64, SD 0.38 kg, P=.22; app with personalized coaching: mean -0.79, SD 0.38 kg; P=.08).ConclusionsSimultaneous diet and exercise self-logging and persistent lifestyle modification coaching were ineffective in lowering systolic blood pressure but effective in losing weight and reducing body fat mass. These results warrant future implementation studies of similar models of care on a broader scale in the context of primary prevention.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03300271; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03300271.

Project description:BackgroundOffice workers typically sit for most of the workday, which has been linked to physical and mental ill-health and premature death. This mixed-methods study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to reducing sitting and increasing standing among office workers who received an intervention prototype (the 'ReSiT [Reducing Sitting Time] Study'). The intervention comprised a sit-stand workstation and tailored advice to enhance motivation, capability and opportunity to displace sitting with standing.MethodsTwenty-nine UK university office workers (aged ?18y, working ?3?days per week, most time spent at a seated desk) participated in a 13-week uncontrolled study. They were initially monitored for one-week. In a subsequent face-to-face consultation, participants received sitting time feedback from a prior one-week monitoring period, and selected from a set of tailored sitting-reduction techniques. Quantitative data comprising sitting, standing and stepping time, which were objectively monitored for 7 consecutive days across three post-intervention timepoints, were descriptively analysed. Qualitative data, from semi-structured interviews conducted at 1, 6 and 12-weeks post-intervention, were thematically analysed.ResultsCompared to baseline, mean sitting time decreased at weeks 1, 6 and 12 by 49.7mins, 118.2mins, and 109.7mins respectively. Despite prior concerns about colleagues' reactions to standing, many reported encouragement from others, and standing could be equally conducive to social interaction or creating private, personal space. Some perceived less cognitively-demanding tasks to be more conducive to standing, though some found standing offered a valued break from challenging tasks. Participants prioritised workload over sitting reduction and were more likely to stand after rather than during work task completion. Temporary context changes, such as holidays, threatened to derail newfound routines.ConclusionsOur findings emphasise the importance of understanding workers' mental representations of their work, and the social functions of sitting and standing in the workplace. Workplace intervention developers should incorporate a pre-intervention sitting time monitoring period, encourage workers to identify personally meaningful tasks and cues for standing, and build organisational support for sitting-reduction. We will use these insights to refine our intervention for self-administered delivery.Trial registrationISRCTN29395780 (registered 21 November 2016).