Effects of a dog activity tracker on owners' walking: a community-based randomised controlled trial.

Autor: Ahmadi MN; Hub D17, Charles Perkins Centre L6 West, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. matthew.ahmadi@sydney.edu.au., Biswas RK; Hub D17, Charles Perkins Centre L6 West, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia., Powell L; School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA., Bauman A; Charles Perkins Centre, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia., Sherrington C; Sydney Musculoskeletal Health and School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney, King George V Building, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (C39), Sydney Local Health District., Sydney, Australia., Podberscek A; University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia., McGreevy P; School of Environmental and Rural Science, Faculty of Science, Agriculture, Business and Law, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia., Rhodes RE; School of Exercise Science, Physical and Health Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada., Stamatakis E; Hub D17, Charles Perkins Centre L6 West, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: BMC research notes [BMC Res Notes] 2024 Nov 14; Vol. 17 (1), pp. 339. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Nov 14.
DOI: 10.1186/s13104-024-06989-0
Abstrakt: Objective: A promising strategy to increase population physical activity is through promotion of dog walking. Informed by multi-process action control and nascent dog-walking theory, we examined the effectiveness of a 3-month technology-based (dog tracker) 2-arm randomised controlled dog-walking intervention to increase dog-owner daily physical activity in the general community in Sydney, Australia.
Results: 37 participants were allocated to the intervention group (mean age = 43.2 [SD 11.9]) and 40 to the control group (mean age = 42.3 [SD 11.9]). Both groups averaged more than 10,500 steps/day at baseline. There was no evidence of within- or between-group physical activity differences across timepoints. The results remained consistent after exclusion of participants who had data collected during COVID-19 lockdowns. Compared with baseline, both groups had significant increases in sedentary time during the post-intervention, and 6 month follow-up. The absence of significant differences between-group physical activity differences may be attributable to the ceiling effect of both groups already being sufficiently active. These results provide useful guidance to future studies intended to assess the efficacy of technology-based dog-walking interventions. Future dog-walking interventions should specifically target physically inactive dog owners.
Trial Registration: ACTRN12619001391167 (10/10/2019); Retrospectively registered.
Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (2016/921) and the Animal Ethics Committee (2017/1134). The study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (https://www.anzctr.org.au/). All participants provided informed written consent. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje