Literature DB >> 33394138

Monitoring the recovery time of children after tonsillectomy using commercial activity trackers.

Philip Lambrechtse1,2, Victoria C Ziesenitz3,4, Andrew Atkinson5, Ernst Jan Bos6, Tatjana Welzel5, Yael Gilgen7, Nicolas Gürtler8, Simone Heuscher8, Adam Frederik Cohen6, Johannes N van den Anker5,9.   

Abstract

An observational prospective feasibility study in which children received a tracker 2 weeks before a tonsillectomy and were required to wear it until four weeks postoperatively. The parents used a diary to log the estimated steps of their child. As primary endpoint, the compliance of complete datasets was compared between the tracker and the diary. As secondary endpoints, the agreement of steps between tracker and diary, and the recovery time after tonsillectomy were analyzed.Twenty-four patients (50% male) with a median age of 6 years were recruited. The tracker had a complete dataset compliance of 91.7% in the pre-operative and 58.3% in postoperative period, whereas the diary's compliance was 62.5% in the pre-operative and 12.5% in the postoperative period. The difference of 29.2% and 45.8% in the pre-operative and postoperative periods between the tracker and the diary was significant (p < 0.005). The tracker and diary had a mean agreement difference of 1063 steps per day. Mean recovery time was 21 days after tonsillectomy.
Conclusion: The results of this pilot study support the use of a tracker in terms of compliance and practicability. Consumer-level activity trackers are a viable alternative to conventional manual logging for clinical use in pediatric research.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03174496 What is known: • Consumer-level activity trackers are already used in clinical research to monitor steps and physical activity. • The use of consumer-level activity trackers in clinical studies has mostly been validated in the adult population. What is new: • This study proves the feasibility of using physical activity trackers in a pediatric population before and after a surgical intervention. • Recovery of a patient could be assessed with an activity tracker.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Activity trackers; At-home monitoring; Recovery; Tonsillectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33394138     DOI: 10.1007/s00431-020-03900-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pediatr        ISSN: 0340-6199            Impact factor:   3.183


  17 in total

1.  How valid are wearable physical activity trackers for measuring steps?

Authors:  Hyun-Sung An; Gregory C Jones; Seoung-Ki Kang; Gregory J Welk; Jung-Min Lee
Journal:  Eur J Sport Sci       Date:  2016-12-02       Impact factor: 4.050

2.  Validity and reliability of Fitbit activity monitors compared to ActiGraph GT3X+ with female adults in a free-living environment.

Authors:  Ryan E R Reid; Jessica A Insogna; Tamara E Carver; Andrea M Comptour; Nicole A Bewski; Cristina Sciortino; Ross E Andersen
Journal:  J Sci Med Sport       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 4.319

3.  Why do children decide not to participate in clinical research: a quantitative and qualitative study.

Authors:  Irma M Hein; Pieter W Troost; Martine C de Vries; Catherijne A J Knibbe; Johannes B van Goudoever; Ramón J L Lindauer
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 3.756

4.  A patient diary as a tool to improve medicine compliance.

Authors:  M T van Berge Henegouwen; H F van Driel; D G Kasteleijn-Nolst Trenité
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  1999-02

5.  Concurrent Validity of Wearable Activity Trackers Under Free-Living Conditions.

Authors:  Skyler M Brooke; Hyun-Sung An; Seoung-Ki Kang; John M Noble; Kris E Berg; Jung-Min Lee
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  The validity of consumer-level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free-living conditions: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Ty Ferguson; Alex V Rowlands; Tim Olds; Carol Maher
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 6.457

7.  Reliability and validity of a new physical activity questionnaire for India.

Authors:  Ranjit Mohan Anjana; Vasudevan Sudha; Nagarajan Lakshmipriya; Sivasankaran Subhashini; Rajendra Pradeepa; Loganathan Geetha; Mookambika Ramya Bai; Rajagopal Gayathri; Mohan Deepa; Ranjit Unnikrishnan; Valsalakumari Sreekumaran Nair Binu; Anura V Kurpad; Viswanathan Mohan
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 6.457

8.  Using Fitness Trackers and Smartwatches to Measure Physical Activity in Research: Analysis of Consumer Wrist-Worn Wearables.

Authors:  André Henriksen; Martin Haugen Mikalsen; Ashenafi Zebene Woldaregay; Miroslav Muzny; Gunnar Hartvigsen; Laila Arnesdatter Hopstock; Sameline Grimsgaard
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 5.428

9.  Comparison of Consumer and Research Monitors under Semistructured Settings.

Authors:  Yang Bai; Gregory J Welk; Yoon Ho Nam; Joey A Lee; Jung-Min Lee; Youngwon Kim; Nathan F Meier; Philip M Dixon
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 5.411

10.  A comparison of wearable fitness devices.

Authors:  Kanitthika Kaewkannate; Soochan Kim
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-05-24       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Remote Monitoring of Patient- and Family-Generated Health Data in Pediatrics.

Authors:  Carolyn Foster; Dana Schinasi; Kristin Kan; Michelle Macy; Derek Wheeler; Allison Curfman
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 9.703

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.