Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Means of Motivation or of Stress? The Use of Fitness Trackers for Self-Monitoring by Older Adults

Motivierend oder überfordernd? Die Nutzung von Fitness Trackern zum Selbst-Monitoring älterer Menschen

  • Published:
HeilberufeScience Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Research has shown that self-monitoring can promote physical activity throughout the lifespan. Self-monitoring is defined as the documentation of exercising and health indicators supported by wearable electronic devices. Appropriate exercise is especially important for health promotion in higher age. It is, however, still unanswered how older adults actually handle devices for self-monitoring and which kind of feedback they wish and need. Also, motivational aspects and further consequences of use are rarely studied.

Aims

The objective of the study was to evaluate experiences, opportunities, and obstacles of self-monitoring when applied by older adults.

Method

A semi-structured group interview was conducted with participants of a preceding usability-study (n = 6, mean age 71.7 years). Topics discussed included individual experiences and the effects of self-monitoring on behaviour. Text data was analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

The analysis revealed four main themes: ‘Reasons for Use’, ‘Utilization Strategies’, ‘Consequences of Use’, and ‘Functionality of the Device’.

Conclusion

In general, older adults are motivated to engage in self-monitoring. Nevertheless some problematic aspects were identified including the missing suitability of currently available products for the needs of older adults. This might lead to overexertion and result in a higher demand for support during usage. Only if those requirements are taken into account can self-monitoring be effective in promoting physical activity in higher age.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Studien haben gezeigt, dass körperliche Aktivität durch Selbst-Monitoring gefördert werden kann. Selbst-Monitoring bezeichnet das Dokumentieren von Bewegung und Gesundheitsindikatoren mit tragbaren elektronischen Geräten. Ausreichend Bewegung ist insbesondere zur Prävention von gesundheitlichen Einschränkungen im höheren Alter wichtig. Bisher ist ungeklärt, wie ältere Menschen Selbst-Monitoring nutzen und welches Feedback sie sich wünschen. Auch motivationale Aspekte und Folgen der Nutzung sind kaum untersucht.

Zielsetzung

Ziel der Studie war es, Erfahrungen, Chancen und Grenzen des Selbst-Monitorings bei älteren Menschen zu untersuchen.

Methode

Mit den Teilnehmern einer Usability-Studie (n = 6, Durchschnittsalter 71,7 Jahre) wurde ein leitfadengestütztes Gruppeninterview geführt. Diskutierte Themen waren Erfahrungen und Auswirkungen des Selbst-Monitorings auf das Verhalten. Die Äußerungen wurden mithilfe qualitativer Inhaltsanalyse ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse

Die Analyse ergab vier Hauptthemen: „Gründe für die Nutzung“, „Handlungsstrategien“, „Folgen der Nutzung“ und „Funktionsfähigkeit des Geräts“.

Schlussfolgerungen

Generell sind ältere Menschen zum Selbst-Monitoring motiviert. Es zeigten sich jedoch auch problematische Aspekte wie eine fehlende Anpassung aktueller Geräte an die Bedürfnisse älterer Personen. Dies kann zu möglicher Überforderung und einem erhöhten Bedarf an Unterstützung bei der Nutzung führen. Wenn diese Anforderungen berücksichtigt werden, kann Selbst-Monitoring zu einer Förderung der Bewegung im höheren Alter beitragen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The different interviewees are referred to with different letters (A to F). The interview passages were translated by the authors.

References

  1. Appelboom, G., Camacho, E., Abraham, M. E., et al. (2014). Smart wearable body sensors for patient self-assessment and monitoring. Archives of Public Health, 72(1), 28. doi:10.1186/2049-3258-72-28.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Bravata, D. M., Smith-Spangler, C., Sundaram, V., et al. (2007). Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 298(19), 2296–2304. doi:10.1001/jama.298.19.2296.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Clemes, S. A., Matchett, N., & Wane, S. L. (2008). Reactivity: an issue for short-term pedometer studies? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 42(1), 68–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Clemes, S. A., & Parker, R. A. A. (2009). Increasing our understanding of reactivity to pedometers in adults. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 41(3), 674–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Crews, D. E., & Zavotka, S. (2006). Aging, disability, and frailty: implications for universal design. Journal of Physiological Anthropology, 25(1), 113–118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Czaja, S. J., Charness, N., Fisk, A. D., Hertzog, C., Nair, S. N., Rogers, W. A., & Sharit, J. (2006). Factors predicting the use of technology: findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and Aging, 21(2), 333–352. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.333.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Dobkin, B. H. (2013). Wearable motion sensors to continuously measure real-world physical activities. Current Opinion in Neurology, 26(6), 602–608. doi:10.1097/WCO.0000000000000026.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Fox, S., & Duggan, M. (2013). Tracking for health. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_TrackingforHealth%20with%20appendix.pdf. Accessed 22 January 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Garatachea, N., Molinero, O., Martínez-García, R., Jiménez-Jiménez, R., González-Gallego, J., & Márquez, S. (2009). Feelings of well being in elderly people: relationship to physical activity and physical function. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 48(3), 306–312. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2008.02.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Haesner, M., Steinert, A., O’Sullivan, J. L., & Steinhagen-Thiessen, E. (2015). Analyse des Umgangs älterer Internetnutzer mit unerwarteten Situationen. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 48(8), 715–721. doi:10.1007/s00391-014-0838-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hussy, W., Schreier, M., & Echterhoff, G. (2010). Forschungsmethoden in Psychologie und Sozialwissenschaften. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Izawa, K. P., Watanabe, S., Omiya, K., Hirano, Y., Oka, K., Osada, N., & Iijima, S. (2005). Effect of the Self-Monitoring Approach on Exercise Maintenance During Cardiac Rehabilitation: A randomized, controlled trial. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 84(5), 313–321. doi:10.1097/01.PHM.0000156901.95289.09.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kang, H. G., Mahoney, D. F., Hoenig, H., Hirth, V. A., Bonato, P., Hajjar, I., & Lipsitz, L. A. (2010). In situ monitoring of health in older adults: technologies and issues. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 58(8), 1579–1586. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02959.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Landi, F., Onder, G., Carpenter, I., Cesari, M., Soldato, M., & Bernabei, R. (2007). Physical activity prevented functional decline among frail community-living elderly subjects in an international observational study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(5), 518–524. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Miller, G. (2012). The smartphone psychology manifesto. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(3), 221–237. doi:10.1177/1745691612441215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Motel-Klingebiel, A., Ziegelmann, J. P., & Wiest, M. (2013). Hochaltrigkeit in der Gesellschaft des langen Lebens. Theoretische Herausforderung, empirisches Problem und sozialpolitische Aufgabe. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 46(1), 5–9. doi:10.1007/s00391-012-0458-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Peel, N. M., McClure, R. J., & Bartlett, H. P. (2005). Behavioral determinants of healthy aging. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(3), 298–304. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2004.12.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rasche, P., Wille, M., Theis, S., Schaefer, K., Schlick, C., & Mertens, A. (2015). Activity tracker and elderly. IEEE International Conference on Computer & Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing & Communications; Dependable, Autonomic & Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence & Computing, Liverpool, 26–28 October 2015. (pp. 1411–1416). IEEE.

  20. Simpson, T. L., Kivlahan, D. R., Bush, K. R., & McFall, M. E. (2005). Telephone self-monitoring among alcohol use disorder patients in early recovery: a randomized study of feasibility and measurement reactivity. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 79(2), 241–250. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.02.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Statistisches Bundesamt (2015). 12. koordinierte Bevölkerungsvorausrechnung. https://www.destatis.de/bevoelkerungspyramide/. Accessed 4 November 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Steinert, A., Wegel, S., & Steinhagen-Thiessen, E. (2015). Selbst-Monitoring der physischen Aktivität von Senioren. HeilberufeSCIENCE, 6, 115–119. doi:10.1007/s16024-015-0251-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stuck, A. E., Walthert, J. M., Nikolaus, T., Büla, C. J., Hohmann, C., & Beck, J. C. (1999). Risk factors for functional status decline in community-living elderly people: a systematic literature review. Social Science & Medicine, 48(4), 445–469. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00370-0.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Trull, T. J., & Ebner-Priemer, U. (2013). Ambulatory assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9, 151–176. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185510.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tudor-Locke, C., Craig, C. L., Aoyagi, Y., et al. (2011). How many steps/day are enough? For older adults and special populations. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 8(80). doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-80.

  26. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2008). 2008 physical activity guidelines for americans. http://health.gov/paguidelines/pdf/paguide.pdf. Accessed 16 February 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wiemeyer, J., & Kliem, A. (2012). Serious games in prevention and rehabilitation – a new panacea for elderly people? European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, 9(1), 41–50. doi:10.1007/s11556-011-0093-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was realized as part of the doctoral programme GROW “Gerontological Research on Well-Being” supported by the North Rhine-Westphalian funding scheme “Fortschrittskollegs”, and Tech4Age, which is underwritten by the Federal Ministry of Education Research (FKZ: 16SV7111) under the supervision of VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Doctoral Programme GROW “Gerontological Research On Well-Being” (supported by the North Rhine-Westphalian funding scheme “Fortschrittskollegs”), University of Cologne, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923, Cologne, Deutschland

    Anna Schlomann & Katja von Storch

  2. Working Area Research Methodology, University of Cologne, Frangenheimstr. 4, 50931, Cologne, Deutschland

    Anna Schlomann & Christian Rietz

  3. Chair and Institute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics, RWTH Aachen University, Bergdriesch 27, 52062, Aachen, Deutschland

    Peter Rasche

Authors
  1. Anna Schlomann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katja von Storch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Rasche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christian Rietz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Schlomann.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

A. Schlomann, K. von Storch, P. Rasche and C. Rietz state that there are no conflicts of interest.

The usability-study has obtained approval from the responsible ethics committee (medical faculty, university hospital Aachen, EK038/15, February 2015). Prior to their participation in the group discussion a written informed consent was signed by all subjects. Data is presented in a form which does not allow for personal identification.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schlomann, A., von Storch, K., Rasche, P. et al. Means of Motivation or of Stress? The Use of Fitness Trackers for Self-Monitoring by Older Adults. HBScience 7, 111–116 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s16024-016-0275-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s16024-016-0275-6

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation