Sports Medicine

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 1–8 | Cite as

How Many Steps/Day Are Enough?

Preliminary Pedometer Indices for Public Health
  • Catrine Tudor-Locke
  • David R. BassettJr
Current Opinion

Abstract

Pedometers are simple and inexpensive body-worn motion sensors that are readily being used by researchers and practitioners to assess and motivate physical activity behaviours. Pedometer-determined physical activity indices are needed to guide their efforts. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to review the rationale and evidence for general pedometer-based indices for research and practice purposes. Specifically, we evaluate popular recommendations for steps/day and attempt to translate existing physical activity guidelines into steps/day equivalents. Also, we appraise the fragmented evidence currently available from associations derived from cross-sectional studies and a limited number of interventions that have documented improvements (primarily in body composition and/or blood pressure) with increased steps/day.

A value of 10 000 steps/day is gaining popularity with the media and in practice and can be traced to Japanese walking clubs and a business slogan 30+ years ago. 10 000 steps/day appears to be a reasonable estimate of daily activity for apparently healthy adults and studies are emerging documenting the health benefits of attaining similar levels. Preliminary evidence suggests that a goal of 10 000 steps/day may not be sustainable for some groups, including older adults and those living with chronic diseases. Another concern about using 10 000 steps/day as a universal step goal is that it is probably too low for children, an important target population in the war against obesity.

Other approaches to pedometer-determined physical activity recommendations that are showing promise of health benefit and individual sustainability have been based on incremental improvements relative to baseline values. Based on currently available evidence, we propose the following preliminary indices be used to classify pedometer-determined physical activity in healthy adults: (i) <5000 steps/day may be used as a ‘sedentary lifestyle index’; (ii) 5000–7499 steps/day is typical of daily activity excluding sports/exercise and might be considered ‘low active’; (iii) 7500–9999 likely includes some volitional activities (and/or elevated occupational activity demands) and might be considered ‘somewhat active’; and (iv) ≥10 000 steps/day indicates the point that should be used to classify individuals as ‘active’. Individuals who take >12 500 steps/day are likely to be classified as ‘highly active’.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Neither author receives support from any pedometer manufacturer or distributor. Dr Tudor-Locke is the author of a commercially-available self-help book (Manpo-kei: The Art and Science of Step Counting, Trafford Publishing, 2003).

References

  1. 1.
    Tudor-Locke C, Myers AM. Challenges and opportunities for measuring physical activity in sedentary adults. Sports Med 2001; 31(2): 91–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    US Department of Health and Human Services. Physical activity and health: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Promotion, 1996Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Physical activity trends: United States, 1990–1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2001; 50(09): 166–9Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, et al. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2000. JAMA 2002; 288(14): 1723–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Masse LC, Ainsworth BE, Tortolero S, et al. Measuring physical activity in midlife, older and minority women: issues from an expert panel. J Womens Health 1998; 7(1): 57–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pate RR, Pratt M, Blair SN, et al. Physical activity and public health: a recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine. JAMA 1995; 273(5): 402–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freedson PS, Miller K. Objective monitoring of physical activity using motion sensors and heart rate. Res Q Exerc Sport 2000; 71(2): 21–9Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bassett Jr DR. Validity and reliability issues in objective monitoring of physical activity. Res Q Exerc Sport 2000; 71(2): 30–6Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moreau KL, DeGarmo R, Langley J, et al. The effectiveness of the ACSM-CDC physical activity recommendation in lowering blood pressure in postmenopausal women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32(S1): 72Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tudor-Locke C, Myers AM, Rodger NW. Formative evaluation of The First Step Program: a practical intervention to increase daily physical activity. Can J Diabetes Care 2000; 24(4): 34–8Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Williams PT. Physical fitness and activity as separate heart disease risk factors: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33(5): 754–61PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bassett Jr DR, Ainsworth BE, Leggett SR, et al. Accuracy of five electronic pedometers for measuring distance walked. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1996; 28(8): 1071–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hendelman D, Miller K, Baggett C, et al. Validity of accelerometry for the assessment of moderate intensity physical activity in the field. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32(9): S442–S50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Le Masurier G, Tudor-Locke C. Comparison of pedometer and accelerometer accuracy under controlled conditions. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003 May; 35(5): 867–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tudor-Locke C, Williams JE, Reis JP, et al. Utility of pedometers for assessing physical activity: convergent validity. Sports Med 2002; 32(12): 795–808PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tudor-Locke C, Myers AM. Methodological considerations for researchers and practitioners using pedometers to measure physical (ambulatory) activity. Res Q Exerc Sport 2001; 72(1): 1–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tudor-Locke C, Myers AM, Rodger NW. Development of a theory-based daily activity intervention for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2001; 27(1): 85–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bassett Jr DR, Strath SJ. Use of pedometers to assess physical activity. In: Welk GJ, editor. Physical activity assessments for health-related research. Champaign (IL): Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc., 2002: 163–78Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tudor-Locke C. Taking steps toward increased physical activity: using pedometers to measure and motivate. Res Digest 2002; 3(7): 1–8Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    US Surgeon General. Surgeon General’s report on physical activity and health: from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [abstract]. JAMA 1996; 276(7): 522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Institute of Medicine. Dietary reference intakes for energy, carbohydrates, fiber, fat, protein and amino acids (macronutrients). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 2002 Sep 5Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krucoff C. Popular, low-cost pedometers: 10,000 steps to a better health. The Seattle Times 1999 Dec 5Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spilner M, Robertson S. Take 10,000 a day! Prevention 2000, 90Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    DeSa P. Easy steps to shape up and slim down. Prevention 2001; Jul: 150–7Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kosta E. Make every step count. Walking 2001; 16: 100–1Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lindberg R. Active living: on the road with the 10,000 steps program. J Am Diet Assoc 2000; 100(8): 878–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hill JO, Wyatt HR, Reed GW, et al. Obesity and the environment: where do we go from here? Science 2003; 299(5608): 853–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hatano Y. Use of the pedometer for promoting daily walking exercise. ICHPER 1993; 29: 4–8Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Welk GJ, Differding JA, Thompson RW, et al. The utility of the Digi-walker step counter to assess daily physical activity patterns. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32(9): S481–S8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wilde BE, Sidman CL, Corbin CB. A 10,000 step count as a physical activity target for sedentary women. Res Q Exerc Sport 2001; 72(4): 411–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tudor-Locke C, Ainsworth BE, Whitt MC, et al. The relationship between pedometer-determined ambulatory activity and body composition variables. Int J Obes 2001; 25: 1571–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yamanouchi K, Takashi T, Chikada K, et al. Daily walking combined with diet therapy is a useful means for obese NIDDM patients not only to reduce body weight but also to improve insulin sensitivity. Diabetes Care 1995; 18(6): 775–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Iwane M, Arita M, Tomimoto S, et al. Walking 10,000 steps/day or more reduces blood pressure and sympathetic nerve activity in mild essential hypertension. Hypertens Res 2000; 23: 573–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Moreau KL, Degarmo R, Langley J, et al. Increasing daily walking lowers blood pressure in postmenopausal women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33(11): 1825–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Swartz AM, Thompson DL. Increasing daily walking improves glucose tolerance in overweight women. Res Q Exerc Sport 2002; 73 Suppl.: A16Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    The 10 000 Steps Rockhampton Project [online]. Available from URL: http://10000steps.cqu.edu.au/ [Accessed 2003 Nov 5]
  37. 37.
    Sugiura H, Kajima K, Mirbod SM, et al. Effects of long-term moderate exercise and increase in number of daily steps on serum lipids in women: randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN21921919]. BMC Womens Health 2002; 2(1): 3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tudor-Locke C, Myers AM, Bell RC, et al. Preliminary outcome evaluation of The First Step Program: a daily physical activity intervention for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Patient Educ Couns 2002; 47(1): 23–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tudor-Locke C. Manpo-kei: the art and science of step counting. Victoria (BC): Trafford Publishing Inc, 2003Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    America on the move [online]. Available from URL: http://www.coloradoonthemove.org [Accessed 2003 Nov 5]
  41. 41.
    Bassett Jr DR, Cureton AL, Ainsworth BE. Measurement of daily walking distance: questionnaire versus pedometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32(5): 1018–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tudor-Locke C, Jones GR, Myers AM, et al. Contribution of structured exercise class participation and informal walking for exercise to daily physical activity in community-dwelling older adults. Res Q Exerc Sport 2002; 73(3): 350–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bernstein MS, Morabia A, Sloutskis D. Definition and prevalence of sedentarism in an urban population. Am J Public Health 1999; 89(6): 862–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jebb SA, Moore MS. Contribution of a sedentary lifestyle and inactivity to the etiology of overweight and obesity: current evidence and research issues. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999; 31(11): S534–S41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tudor-Locke C, Ainsworth BE, Thompson RW, et al. Comparison of pedometer and accelerometer measures of free-living physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002; 34(12): 2045–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    US Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon General’s call to action to prevent and decrease overweight and obesity. Rockville (MD): US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General, 2001Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rowlands AV, Eston RG, Ingledew DK. Relationship between activity levels, aerobic fitness, and body fat in 8- to 10-yr-old children. J Appl Physiol 1999; 86(4): 1428–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Vincent SD, Pangrazi RP. An examination of the activity patterns of elementary school children. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2002; 14(4): 432–41Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Cole TJ, Bellizzi MC, Flegal KM, et al. Establishing a standard definition for child overweight and obesity worldwide: international survey. BMJ 2000; 320(7244): 1240–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. The President’s Challenge Physical Activity and Fitness Awards Program. Bloomington (IN): President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, US Department of Health and Human Services, 2001Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Corbin CB, Le Masurier G, Franks BD. Making sense of multiple physical activity recommendations. Res Digest 2002; 3(19): 1–8Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Corbin CB, Pangrazi RP. Are American children and youth fit? Res Q Exerc Sport 1992; 63(2): 96–106PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catrine Tudor-Locke
    • 1
  • David R. BassettJr
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Exercise and WellnessArizona State University EastMesaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Health and Exercise ScienceUniversity of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations