Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-b5k59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-12T23:32:45.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SMARTPHONE REMINDER FOR PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN PEOPLE WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2017

David Pérez-Cruzado  and
Antonio Ignacio Cuesta-Vargas
David Pérez-Cruzado
Affiliation:
Department of Physiotherapy, University of Malaga
Antonio Ignacio Cuesta-Vargas
Affiliation:
Department of Physiotherapy School of Clinical Science, Faculty of Health Science, Queensland University Technology acuesta@uma.es
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Several studies have been carried out regarding different interventions in an effort to improve levels of physical activity in people with an intellectual disability (ID). Studies have been carried out regarding physical activity interventions (1), educational interventions (2), and multimodal interventions (3). New technologies are currently being used to carry out changes in daily habits and to promote health in different pathologies but not in people with an ID (4;5). Due to the poor maintenance of physical activity that we have found in people with ID, the objective of the present study is to determine the maintenance of levels of physical activity, quality of life, self-efficacy, and social support in this population through an intervention with an application in their smartphones.

Information

Type
Letter
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 33 , Issue 4: Mini-Theme: Stories of HTA Impact , 2017 , pp. 442 - 443
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

BACKGROUND

Several studies have been carried out regarding different interventions in an effort to improve levels of physical activity in people with an intellectual disability (ID). Studies have been carried out regarding physical activity interventions (Reference Mitchell, Melville and Stalker1), educational interventions (Reference Heller and Sorensen2), and multimodal interventions (Reference Heller, McCubbin, Drum and Peterson3). New technologies are currently being used to carry out changes in daily habits and to promote health in different pathologies but not in people with an ID (Reference Sheil, Davis, Lowery and Hill4;Reference Patterson5). Due to the poor maintenance of physical activity that we have found in people with ID, the objective of the present study is to determine the maintenance of levels of physical activity, quality of life, self-efficacy, and social support in this population through an intervention with an application in their smartphones.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was carried out. Eight people with mild ID (intelligence quotient = 55–70) participated at the occupational center, Aspromanis Industrial (Malaga, Spain). All participants carried out a multimodal intervention (physical activity + education) (Reference Pérez-Cruzado and Cuesta-Vargas6). After the intervention, the sample was divided in two groups: four people with the smartphone intervention and four in the group with no intervention. The smartphone intervention consisted of installing an application in their smartphones. With this application, educational advice and reminders appeared in their smartphones every 2 days. The smartphone intervention was carried out over a 12-week period. People in the smartphone intervention group had to answer at least 80 percent of the messages or their data were considered as drop-outs. Outcome measures (International Physical Activity Questionnaire [IPAQ], WHOQoL, and Self-Efficacy/Social Support Scales for Activity for persons with Intellectual Disability [SE/SS-AID]) were measured before and after the intervention. Physical activity was measured in metabolic equivalent of task (METs) as the amount of oxygen consumed while sitting at rest and is equal to 3–5 ml O2 per kg body weight × min (Reference Jetté, Sidney and Blümchen7).

RESULTS

In the present study, significant intragroup increase were found in the Smartphone group in vigorous physical activity (F = 8.21; p = .01), METS walking (F = 13.61; p = .02), and total METS (F = 6.74; p = .05). Changes found between both groups in quality of life (F = 0.23; p = .01), professional support (F = 6.72; p = .04), and peer support (F = 8.33; p = .03) are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Differences after Smartphone Intervention

Note. Bold values are made for significant changes. MET, metabolic equivalent of task; METS VIG, vigorous METS, METS MOD, moderate METS, QoL, quality of life; SE, self-efficacy, SFamily, family support, SProf, professional support; Speers, peers support.

DISCUSSION

In the literature, we have not found any similar studies on a smartphone intervention for people to encourage physical activity in people with an ID, so this is the first study of this kind. Similar interventions that have used a smartphone application to serve as reminders have been carried out among people with cardiac diseases (Reference Antypas and Wangberg8) and among healthy people (Reference Thorsteinsen, Vittersø and Svendsen9;Reference Glynn, Hayes and Casey10). The main strength of the present pilot study is the novelty of the use of an application for smartphones among people with ID because no previous studies had been conducted using a similar intervention in this population, and it is very important to know the changes that new technologies could offer to this population. However, it would be important to carry out this intervention in a bigger sample of participants and during a longer period of time to see if similar changes are found and if they are sustained over a longer period.

CONCLUSIONS

People with IDs who carried out an intervention with smartphones had greater levels of maintenance of physical activity than did those who did not use this intervention. The intervention with the smartphone also increased quality of life and professional and peer support.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors have nothing to disclose.

References

REFERENCES

1. Mitchell, F, Melville, C, Stalker, K, et al. Walk well: A randomised controlled trial of a walking intervention for adults with intellectual disabilities: Study protocol. BMC Public Health. 2013;13: 620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Heller, T, Sorensen, A. Promoting healthy aging in adults with developmental disabilities. Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2013;18:22–30.Google Scholar
3. Heller, T, McCubbin, JA, Drum, C, Peterson, J. Physical activity and nutrition health promotion interventions: what is working for people with intellectual disabilities? Intellect Dev Disabil. 2011;49:26–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Sheil, F, Davis, S, Lowery, AJ, Hill, ADK. The use and limitations of SMS reminders to improve outpatient attendance rates. 2014;107:189.Google Scholar
5. Patterson, V. Telemedicine for epilepsy support in resource-poor settings. Front Public Health. 2014;2:120.Google Scholar
6. Pérez-Cruzado, D, Cuesta-Vargas, AI. Changes on quality of life, self-efficacy and social support for activities and physical fitness in people with intellectual disabilities through multimodal intervention. Eur J Spec Needs Educ. 2016;0:1–12.Google Scholar
7. Jetté, M, Sidney, K, Blümchen, G. Metabolic equivalents (METS) in exercise testing, exercise prescription, and evaluation of functional capacity. Clin Cardiol. 1990;13:555–565.Google Scholar
8. Antypas, K, Wangberg, SC. An Internet- and mobile-based tailored intervention to enhance maintenance of physical activity after cardiac rehabilitation: short-term results of a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16:e77.Google Scholar
9. Thorsteinsen, K, Vittersø, J, Svendsen, GB. Increasing physical activity efficiently: an experimental pilot study of a website and mobile phone intervention. Int J Telemed Appl. 2014;2014:746232.Google ScholarPubMed
10. Glynn, LG, Hayes, PS, Casey, M, et al. Effectiveness of a smartphone application to promote physical activity in primary care: The SMART MOVE randomised controlled trial. Br J Gen Pract J R Coll Gen Pract. 2014;64:e384–e391.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Differences after Smartphone Intervention