Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 6, 2025
Visualization of Intensity Levels to Reduce the Gap Between Self-Reported and Directly Measured Physical Activity
Published on: March 7, 2019
Fitbit Use and Activity Levels From Intervention to 2 Years After: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled
Sheri J Hartman1,2, Ruohui Chen1,2, Rowena M Tam1
1Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States.
Background:
There has been a rapid increase in the use of commercially available activity trackers, such as Fitbit, in physical activity intervention research. However, little is known about the long-term sustained use of trackers and behavior change after short-term interventions.
Objective:
This study aims to use minute-level data collected from a Fitbit tracker for up to 2 years after the end of a randomized controlled trial to examine patterns of Fitbit use and activity over time.
Methods:
Participants in this secondary data analysis were 75 female breast cancer survivors who had been enrolled in a 12-week physical activity randomized controlled trial. Participants randomized to the exercise intervention (full intervention arm) received a Fitbit One, which was worn daily throughout the 12-week intervention, and then were followed for 2 years after the intervention. Participants randomized to the waitlist arm, after completing the randomized controlled trial, received a Fitbit One and a minimal version of the exercise intervention (light intervention arm), and then were followed for 2 years after the intervention. Average and daily adherence and MVPA were compared between the 2 groups in the interventional and postinterventional periods using both linear and generalized additive mixed effects models.
Results:
Adherence to wearing the Fitbit during the 12-week intervention period was significantly higher in the full intervention arm than in the light intervention arm (85% vs 60%; P<.001). Average adherence was significantly lower for both study arms during the follow-up period than in the intervention period; however, there were statistically different patterns of adherence during the follow-up period, with the light intervention arm having steeper declines than the full intervention arm over time (P<.001). Similar to the adherence results, mean minutes of Fitbit-measured MVPA was higher for the full intervention arm than for the light intervention arm during the 12-week intervention period (mean MVPA 27.89 minutes/day, SD 16.38 minutes/day vs 18.35 minutes/day, SD 12.64 minutes/day; P<.001). During the follow-up period, average MVPA was significantly lower than the 12-week intervention period for both the full intervention arm (21.74 minutes/day, SD 24.65 minutes/day; P=.002) and the light intervention arm (15.03 minutes/day, SD 13.27 minutes/day; P=.004). Although the mean MVPA in each arm was similar across the follow-up period (P=.33), the pattern of daily MVPA was significantly different between the 2 groups (P<.001).
Conclusions:
While adherence to wearing activity trackers and maintaining physical activities declined after completion of a 12-week exercise intervention, a more active interventional strategy resulted in greater wear time and activity levels during the intervention and more stable patterns of adherence and activity in the long term. An improved understanding of long-term maintenance patterns may inform improved exercise interventions that result in sustained increases in physical activity.
Trial Registration:
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02332876; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02332876.
