Financial incentives for physical activity in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The use of financial incentives to promote physical activity (PA) has grown in popularity due in part to technological advances that make it easier to track and reward PA. The purpose of this study was to update the evidence on the effects of incentives on PA in adults. DATA SOURCES: Medline, PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, CCTR, CINAHL and COCH. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) published between 2012 and May 2018 examining the impact of incentives on PA. DESIGN: A simple count of studies with positive and null effects ('vote counting') was conducted. Random-effects meta-analyses were also undertaken for studies reporting steps per day for intervention and post-intervention periods. RESULTS: 23 studies involving 6074 participants were included (64.42% female, mean age = 41.20 years). 20 out of 22 studies reported positive intervention effects and four out of 18 reported post-intervention (after incentives withdrawn) benefits. Among the 12 of 23 studies included in the meta-analysis, incentives were associated with increased mean daily step counts during the intervention period (pooled mean difference (MD), 607.1; 95% CI: 422.1 to 792.1). Among the nine of 12 studies with post-intervention daily step count data incentives were associated with increased mean daily step counts (pooled MD, 513.8; 95% CI:312.7 to 714.9). CONCLUSION: Demonstrating rising interest in financial incentives, 23 RCTs were identified. Modest incentives ($1.40 US/day) increased PA for interventions of short and long durations and after incentives were removed, though post-intervention 'vote counting' and pooled results did not align. Nonetheless, and contrary to what has been previously reported, these findings suggest a short-term incentive 'dose' may promote sustained PA.

The energy expenditure benefits of reallocating sedentary time with physical activity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: We compared direct and daily cumulative energy expenditure (EE) differences associated with reallocating sedentary time to physical activity in adults for meaningful EE changes. Methods: Peer-reviewed studies in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to March 2017. Randomized and non-randomized interventions with sedentary time and EE outcomes in adults were included. Study quality was assessed by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute tool, and summarized using random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. Results: In total, 26 studies were reviewed, and 24 studies examined by meta-analysis. Reallocating 6-9 h of sedentary time to light-intensity physical activity (LIPA) (standardized mean difference [SMD], 2.501 [CI: 1.204-5.363]) had lower cumulative EE than 6-9 h of combined LIPA and moderate-vigorous intensity physical activity (LIPA and moderate-vigorous physical activity [MVPA]) (SMD, 5.218 [CI: 3.822-6.613]). Reallocating 1 h of MVPA resulted in greater cumulative EE than 3-5 h of LIPA and MVPA, but <6-9 h of LIPA and MVPA. Conclusions: Comparable EE can be achieved by different strategies, and promoting MVPA might be effective for those individuals where a combination of MVPA and LIPA is challenging.

Cardiac rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries: a review on cost and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: By 2030, more than 80% of cardiovascular disease-related deaths and disability-adjusted life years will occur in the 139 low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) has been demonstrated to be effective and cost-effective mainly based on data from high-income countries. The purpose of this paper was to review the literature for cost and cost-effectiveness data on CR in LMICs. METHODS: MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) electronic databases were searched for CR 'cost' and 'cost-effectiveness' data in LMICs. RESULTS: Five CR publications with cost and cost-effectiveness data from middle-income countries were identified with none from low-income countries. Studies from Brazil demonstrated mean monthly savings of US$190 for CR, with a US$48 increase in a control group with mean costs of US$503 for a 3-month CR program. Mean costs to the public health care system of US$360 and US$540 when paid out-of-pocket were reported for a 3-month CR program in seven Latin American middle-income countries. Cardiac rehabilitation is reported to be cost-effective in both Brazil and Colombia. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac rehabilitation for patients with heart failure in Brazil and Colombia was estimated to be cost-effective. However, given the limited health care budgets in many LMICs, affordable CR models will need to be developed for LMICs, particularly for low-income countries.

Financial incentives for exercise adherence in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Less than 5% of U.S. adults accumulate the required dose of exercise to maintain health. Behavioral economics has stimulated renewed interest in economic-based, population-level health interventions to address this issue. Despite widespread implementation of financial incentive-based public health and workplace wellness policies, the effects of financial incentives on exercise initiation and maintenance in adults remain unclear. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search of 15 electronic databases for RCTs reporting the impact of financial incentives on exercise-related behaviors and outcomes was conducted in June 2012. A meta-analysis of exercise session attendance among included studies was conducted in April 2013. A qualitative analysis was conducted in February 2013 and structured along eight features of financial incentive design. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies were included (N=1453; ages 18-85 years and 50% female). Pooled results favored the incentive condition (z=3.81, p<0.0001). Incentives also exhibited significant, positive effects on exercise in eight of the 11 included studies. One study determined that incentives can sustain exercise for longer periods (>1 year), and two studies found exercise adherence persisted after the incentive was withdrawn. Promising incentive design feature attributes were noted. Assured, or "sure thing," incentives and objective behavioral assessment in particular appear to moderate incentive effectiveness. Previously sedentary adults responded favorably to incentives 100% of the time (n=4). CONCLUSIONS: The effect estimate from the meta-analysis suggests that financial incentives increase exercise session attendance for interventions up to 6 months in duration. Similarly, a simple count of positive (n=8) and null (n=3) effect studies suggests that financial incentives can increase exercise adherence in adults in the short term (<6 months).