Why the study?
Does pedometry prevent cardiorespiratory fitness decline in preclinical medical students?
Does pedometry prevent cardiorespiratory fitness decline in preclinical medical students?
Providing pedometers to medical students did not significantly prevent the decline in cardiorespiratory fitness over 1 year, likely limited by poor long-term adherence.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Pedometer provision showed no significant fitness benefit in students; leaves open adherence-focused interventions for prospective testing.
INTRODUCTION: Physically active providers are more likely to prescribe exercise. Unfortunately, many become sedentary during their training. We examined pedometry as an incentive to promote physical activity in a cohort of medical students. METHODS: This was a prospective, unblinded clinical trial of pedometry. 107 preclinical medical students volunteered. 50 students received Fitbit pedometers and 57 served as controls. All students ran 1.5- or 2-mile timed runs before pedometer issue, and again 1 year after. Change in run times were the primary outcome measure. Step counts, body composition, and exercise frequency were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 76% of students with pedometers reported increased motivation to exercise and 57% reported changing daily routines as a result of pedometry. Active pedometry participants declined from 48/50 initially to 22/50 over 13 months. Run times slowed an average of 5.0 seconds for pedometry users vs. 12.3 seconds for the control group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: A subset of future physicians reported increased motivation to exercise after a trial of pedometry. However, adherence over the long term was poor and it seems to have a limited impact on aerobic exercise performance in this population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lystrup et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: