4.3 Article

Use of Fitbit Technology Does Not Impact Health Biometrics in a Community of Older Adults

Journal

TELEMEDICINE AND E-HEALTH
Volume 27, Issue 4, Pages 409-413

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2020.0060

Keywords

telemedicine; telehealth; Fitbit; wearable technology; hypertension

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The offering of Fitbit technology did not lead to significant changes in cardiovascular health metrics in older adults, but participation in the TIPS initiative may have a positive effect on systolic blood pressure.
Introduction:To evaluate if the offering of Fitbit technology led to changes in cardiovascular health metrics in a cohort of older adults. Methods:A retrospective cohort study was developed in two community-embedded health monitoring sites, located in aggregate housing communities for older adults in Westchester County, NY. Participants included older adults (55 years or older) enrolled in the Telehealth Intervention Programs for Seniors (TIPS) initiative, a community-embedded remote patient monitoring initiative. Weekly blood pressure, heart rate, weight, and blood oxygenation were taken on all participants. For participants who accepted a Fitbit Zip device, a weekly step count was also collected. Results:Ninety-four TIPS participants were offered Fitbit technology. Thirty participants accepted the technology and used it for a minimum of 6 months. No significant differences in any of the regularly acquired biometrics were noted between Fitbit users and non-Fitbit users. Across all participants, regardless of Fitbit use, there was a significant decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP) over time. Conclusions:Neither Fitbit Zip ownership or compliance to Fitbit Zip usage influenced any of the biometrics taken as part of the TIPS. However, participation in the TIPS initiative may have an overall positive effect on SBP in older adults.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available