Search

Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to compare steps per day across ActiGraph models, wear locations, and filtering methods. A secondary aim was to compare ActiGraph steps per day to those estimated by the ankle-worn StepWatch., Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies of adults published before May 12, 2022, that compared free-living steps per day of ActiGraph step counting methods and studies that compared ActiGraph to StepWatch. Random-effects meta-analysis compared ActiGraph models, wear locations, filter mechanisms, and ActiGraph to StepWatch steps per day. A sensitivity analysis of wear location by younger and older age was included., Results: Twelve studies, with 46 comparisons, were identified. When worn on the hip, the AM-7164 recorded 123% of the GT series steps (no low-frequency extension (no LFE) or default filter). However, the AM-7164 recorded 72% of the GT series steps when the LFE was enabled. Independent of the filter used (i.e., LFE, no LFE), ActiGraph GT series monitors captured more steps on the wrist than on the hip, especially among older adults. Enabling the LFE on the GT series monitors consistently recorded more steps, regardless of wear location. When using the default filter (no LFE), ActiGraph recorded fewer steps than StepWatch (ActiGraph on hip 73% and ActiGraph on wrist 97% of StepWatch steps). When LFE was enabled, ActiGraph recorded more steps than StepWatch (ActiGraph on the hip, 132%; ActiGraph on the wrist, 178% of StepWatch steps)., Conclusions: The choice of ActiGraph model, wear location, and filter all impacted steps per day in adults. These can markedly alter the steps recorded compared with a criterion method (StepWatch). This review provides critical insights for comparing studies using different ActiGraph step counting methods., (Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Sports Medicine.)

Background: Although 10 000 steps per day is widely promoted to have health benefits, there is little evidence to support this recommendation. We aimed to determine the association between number of steps per day and stepping rate with all-cause mortality., Methods: In this meta-analysis, we identified studies investigating the effect of daily step count on all-cause mortality in adults (aged ≥18 years), via a previously published systematic review and expert knowledge of the field. We asked participating study investigators to process their participant-level data following a standardised protocol. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality collected from death certificates and country registries. We analysed the dose-response association of steps per day and stepping rate with all-cause mortality. We did Cox proportional hazards regression analyses using study-specific quartiles of steps per day and calculated hazard ratios (HRs) with inverse-variance weighted random effects models., Findings: We identified 15 studies, of which seven were published and eight were unpublished, with study start dates between 1999 and 2018. The total sample included 47 471 adults, among whom there were 3013 deaths (10·1 per 1000 participant-years) over a median follow-up of 7·1 years ([IQR 4·3-9·9]; total sum of follow-up across studies was 297 837 person-years). Quartile median steps per day were 3553 for quartile 1, 5801 for quartile 2, 7842 for quartile 3, and 10 901 for quartile 4. Compared with the lowest quartile, the adjusted HR for all-cause mortality was 0·60 (95% CI 0·51-0·71) for quartile 2, 0·55 (0·49-0·62) for quartile 3, and 0·47 (0·39-0·57) for quartile 4. Restricted cubic splines showed progressively decreasing risk of mortality among adults aged 60 years and older with increasing number of steps per day until 6000-8000 steps per day and among adults younger than 60 years until 8000-10 000 steps per day. Adjusting for number of steps per day, comparing quartile 1 with quartile 4, the association between higher stepping rates and mortality was attenuated but remained significant for a peak of 30 min (HR 0·67 [95% CI 0·56-0·83]) and a peak of 60 min (0·67 [0·50-0·90]), but not significant for time (min per day) spent walking at 40 steps per min or faster (1·12 [0·96-1·32]) and 100 steps per min or faster (0·86 [0·58-1·28])., Interpretation: Taking more steps per day was associated with a progressively lower risk of all-cause mortality, up to a level that varied by age. The findings from this meta-analysis can be used to inform step guidelines for public health promotion of physical activity., Funding: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AEP and CFP received funding for this project from US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Intergovernmental Personnel Act Agreement. BJJ receives grant funding through the British Heart Foundation. MRC and RSV have received grant funding through National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH). I-ML, KPG, and PP receive grant funding through NIH. KRE receives grant funding through NIH, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, US Department of Transportation, and North Carolina Department of Transportation; receives consulting fees from NIH; and is on the Board of Trustees with the American College of Sports Medicine. DD has received grant funding through German Research Foundation, travel expenses for 10th International Meeting on Ageing, honoraria for being an instructor at Boston University School of Public Health, been an unpaid speaker for German Society of Epidemiology, and been an unpaid member of the Alumni Leadership Council of Boston University School of Public Health. JS receives grant funding through National Institutes on Aging, NIH. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Engaging in regular physical activity (PA) and reducing time spent in sedentary behaviors is critically important to prevent and control non-communicable diseases (NCDs). However, global public health efforts to promote and encourage maintenance of PA behavior on a population level remains challenging. To address what is now described as a global physical inactivity pandemic, a breadth of research has focused on understanding the relation of built environment characteristics, including aspects of urban design, transportation and land-use planning, to PA behavior across multiple domains in life, and subsequently how changes in environmental attributes influence changes in PA patterns in diverse populations and subgroups. This review describes the role the built environment has on improving the promotion and the engagement of PA, particularly in the context of active transportation and leisure time domains of PA. An additional focus will be on the disparities in access to activity-promoting environments and the differential effects of environmental interventions in disadvantaged populations. This paper will further discuss opportunities for public health and policy to advocate for and prioritize the implementation of equitable and effective interventions that aim to expand/improve activity-supportive infrastructures within neighborhoods and communities with the ultimate goal of meaningful population-level increases in PA., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No disclosure or conflict of interest to report., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Daily step counts is an intuitive metric that has demonstrated success in motivating physical activity in adults and may hold potential for future public health physical activity recommendations. This review seeks to clarify the pattern of the associations between daily steps and subsequent all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality, and dysglycemia, as well as the number of daily steps needed for health outcomes., Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify prospective studies assessing daily step count measured by pedometer or accelerometer and their associations with all-cause mortality, CVD morbidity or mortality, and dysglycemia (dysglycemia or diabetes incidence, insulin sensitivity, fasting glucose, HbA1c). The search was performed across the Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception to August 1, 2019. Eligibility criteria included longitudinal design with health outcomes assessed at baseline and subsequent timepoints; defining steps per day as the exposure; reporting all-cause mortality, CVD morbidity or mortality, and/or dysglycemia outcomes; adults ≥18 years old; and non-patient populations., Results: Seventeen prospective studies involving over 30,000 adults were identified. Five studies reported on all-cause mortality (follow-up time 4-10 years), four on cardiovascular risk or events (6 months to 6 years), and eight on dysglycemia outcomes (3 months to 5 years). For each 1000 daily step count increase at baseline, risk reductions in all-cause mortality (6-36%) and CVD (5-21%) at follow-up were estimated across a subsample of included studies. There was no evidence of significant interaction by age, sex, health conditions or behaviors (e.g., alcohol use, smoking status, diet) among studies that tested for interactions. Studies examining dysglycemia outcomes report inconsistent findings, partially due to heterogeneity across studies of glycemia-related biomarker outcomes, analytic approaches, and sample characteristics., Conclusions: Evidence from longitudinal data consistently demonstrated that walking an additional 1000 steps per day can help lower the risk of all-cause mortality, and CVD morbidity and mortality in adults, and that health benefits are present below 10,000 steps per day. However, the shape of the dose-response relation is not yet clear. Data are currently lacking to identify a specific minimum threshold of daily step counts needed to obtain overall health benefit.