Randomized controlled trial shows no significant change in time to return to baseline activity in abdominoplasty patients using a wearable tracker, suggesting standard care suffices.
Background Postoperative management following abdominoplasty varies widely, particularly regarding improving the time to return to baseline physical activity. Objectives The goal of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the rate of return to baseline activity after abdominoplasty between patients receiving activity reminders from a wearable fitness tracker (actigraphy) and those following standard postoperative activity recommendations. Methods Patients undergoing cosmetic abdominoplasties were enrolled between December 2020 and December 2022. Those using actigraphy devices with activity reminders prior to enrollment were excluded. Patients were randomized to receive a wearable actigraphy monitor either with or without movement reminders. Only those with at least 5 days of preoperative and 7 weeks of postoperative step data were included in the final analysis. Results A total of 51 patients were enrolled in the study with a mean age of 44 ± 10.2 years. The attrition rate was 30/51 (59%), with 67% and 52% of the intervention group not completing the study (p=0.16). Among the 21 patients with complete data, the mean time to return to baseline steps was 5.4 weeks in the control group and 5.6 weeks in the intervention group (p=0.81). By the end of postoperative week 8, 87.5% of the control group and 84.6% of the intervention group had reached their baseline (p = 1). Conclusions Structured reminders through an actigraphy device did not significantly change the time to return to baseline after abdominoplasty. Most patients returned to their baseline steps at the end of the study period regardless of intervention, providing valuable insight into the typical recovery time following abdominoplasty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abbott et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: