| Literature DB >> 19666456 |
Miriam Wanner1, Eva Martin-Diener, Charlotte Braun-Fahrländer, Georg Bauer, Brian W Martin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Effective interventions are needed to reduce the chronic disease epidemic. The Internet has the potential to provide large populations with individual advice at relatively low cost.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19666456 PMCID: PMC2763402 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1179
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Figure 1Study procedure for each group
Figure 2Screenshot of the tailored intervention
Figure 3Screenshot of the standard website for the CG
Figure 4Participant flow: recruitment channels, randomization, baseline, and follow-up assessments
Characteristics of participants at baseline according to groupa
| Self-Reported Measures | Total (n = 1531) | CG (n = 688) | IG (n = 681) | P(IG-CG) | SU (n = 162) | P(IG-SU) |
| Female (%) | 74.9 | 75.9 | 74.7 | .63 | 71.0 | .33 |
| Age, years | 43.7 ± 13.1 | 44.2 ± 12.8 | 44.2 ± 13.3 | .99 | 38.8 ± 13.0 | < .001 |
| Age groups (%) | .32 | < .001 | ||||
| < 30 years | 16.2 | 13.8 | 15.3 | 30.3 | ||
| 30-60 years | 72.9 | 75.6 | 72.1 | 64.8 | ||
| > 60 years | 10.9 | 10.6 | 12.6 | 4.9 | ||
| Living with a partner (%) | 70.0 | 70.4 | 70.8 | .86 | 65.4 | .18 |
| Living with children (%) | 53.2 | 56.3 | 53.5 | .30 | 38.9 | .001 |
| Swiss nationality (%) | 87.3 | 86.2 | 88.6 | .19 | 86.4 | .45 |
| University degree (%) | 24.9 | 25.2 | 24.1 | .65 | 27.2 | .41 |
| Smokers (%) | 13.1 | 10.9 | 12.8 | .28 | 23.5 | .001 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 24.6 ± 4.6 | 24.5 ± 4.5 | 24.8 ± 4.6 | .38 | 24.5 ± 4.6 | .57 |
| Overweight and obese (%) | 39.3 | 38.3 | 41.1 | .30 | 36.4 | .28 |
| Meeting HEPA recommendations (%) | 40.8 | 40.4 | 40.9 | .84 | 42.2 | .75 |
| Total reported activity time, minutes/week | 277 ± 253 | 276 ± 256 | 276 ± 258 | .99 | 283 ± 222 | .76 |
| Objective Measures | Total (n = 133) | CG (n = 52) | IG (n = 62) | P(IG-CG) | SU (n = 19) | P(IG-SU) |
| Mean counts per minute | 451 ± 186 | 450 ± 176 | 457 ± 196 | .85 | 436 ± 193 | .69 |
| Total accelerometry activity time, | 377 ± 214 | 383 ± 211 | 383 ± 227 | .99 | 341 ± 183 | .47 |
aValues are mean ± SD unless otherwise noted.
Figure 5Changes in total reported activity time (minutes/week) between baseline and FU3 according to group, for all participants with complete data (n = 736) and separately for those meeting (n = 336) and not meeting (n = 400) the HEPA recommendations at baseline
Percent changes in self-reported physical activity between baseline and each follow-up according to groupa
| Baseline to FU1 | Baseline to FU2 | Baseline to FU3 | ||||
| CG | +2.2% | .27 | −0.8% | .71 | +3.8% | .12 |
| IG | +2.3% | .27 | −1.7% | .45 | +4.0% | .21 |
| SU | +7.4% | .11 | −2.0% | .69 | +18.3% | .005 |
| CG | +4.8% | .13 | −3.7% | .27 | +4.5% | .25 |
| IG | +4.7% | .14 | −2.6% | .52 | +3.4% | .51 |
| SU | +9.6% | .11 | +4.9% | .48 | +15.4% | .19 |
aResults are based on participants with complete data at two time points (see Figure 4 for number of participants).
Time and group parameters for changes in physical activity, based on mixed logistic and mixed linear modelsa
| Meeting HEPA Recommendations | Total Reported Activity Time (minutes/week) | |||||||
| Unadjusted | Adjusted | Unadjusted | Adjusted | |||||
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | Coeff | 95% CI | Coeff | 95% CI | |
| IG | 1.04 | 0.68-1.57 | 1.02 | 0.72-1.45 | 0.02 | −0.10, 0.15 | 0.02 | −0.08, 0.13 |
| SU | 1.15 | 0.59-2.24 | 1.08 | 0.62-1.89 | 0.16 | −0.04, 0.35 | 0.17 | 0.000-0.35 |
| FU1 (6 weeks) | 1.34 | 0.96-1.85 | 1.30 | 0.93-1.82 | 0.15 | 0.06-0.23 | 0.14 | 0.05-0.22 |
| FU2 (6 months) | 1.04 | 0.75-1.46 | 1.01 | 0.71-1.42 | 0.02 | −0.06, 0.11 | 0.02 | −0.07, 0.10 |
| FU3 (13 months) | 1.49 | 1.05-2.11 | 1.47 | 1.03-2.09 | 0.19 | 0.10-0.28 | 0.19 | 0.10-0.28 |
aBasic unit is the CG at baseline. Adjusted models include gender, age, BMI category, and stage of change at baseline.
Percent changes in objective physical activity between baseline and each follow-up according to groupa
| Baseline to FU1 | Baseline to FU2 | Baseline to FU3 | ||||
| CG | −4.8% | .19 | −11.6% | .004 | −8.1% | .03 |
| IG | +2.5% | .52 | −8.0% | .06 | −1.2% | .83 |
| SU | +1.5% | .83 | −16.2% | .04 | −2.1% | .81 |
| CG | −6.2% | .29 | −17.5% | < .001 | −10.3% | .03 |
| IG | −1.5% | .82 | −5.4% | .29 | −1.2% | .87 |
| SU | −5.1% | .72 | −29.1% | .045 | −16.0% | .16 |
aResults are based on participants with complete data at two time points.