The acceptability of using wearable electronic devices to monitor physical activity of patients with Multiple Myeloma undergoing treatment: a systematic review.
Tommy Brown, Ann Muls, Charlotte Pawlyn, Kevin Boyd, Susanne Cruickshank
{"title":"The acceptability of using wearable electronic devices to monitor physical activity of patients with Multiple Myeloma undergoing treatment: a systematic review.","authors":"Tommy Brown, Ann Muls, Charlotte Pawlyn, Kevin Boyd, Susanne Cruickshank","doi":"10.46989/001c.121406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Multiple myeloma (MM) is diagnosed in 6,000 people in the UK yearly. A performance status measure, based on the patients' reported level of physical activity, is used to assess patients' fitness for treatment. This systematic review aims to explore the current evidence for the acceptability of using wearable devices in patients treated for MM to measure physical activity directly.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three databases were searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL) up until 7th September 2023. Prospective studies using wearable devices to monitor physical activity in patients on treatment for MM were included. Bias across the studies was assessed using the CASP tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies, with 220 patients on treatment for MM, were included. Only two studies had a low risk of bias. Different wearable device brands were used for varying lengths of time and were worn on either the wrist, upper arm, or chest. Adherence, reported in seven studies, ranged from 50% to 90%. Six studies reported an adherence greater than 75%. Although physical activity was also measured in a heterogenous manner, most studies reported reduced physical activity during treatment, associated with a higher symptom burden.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Monitoring patients receiving treatment for MM with a wearable device appears acceptable as an objective measure to evaluate physical activity. Due to the heterogeneity of the methods used, the generalisability of the results is limited. Future studies should explore the data collected prospectively and their ability to predict relevant clinical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":93942,"journal":{"name":"Clinical hematology international","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11391912/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical hematology international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46989/001c.121406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is diagnosed in 6,000 people in the UK yearly. A performance status measure, based on the patients' reported level of physical activity, is used to assess patients' fitness for treatment. This systematic review aims to explore the current evidence for the acceptability of using wearable devices in patients treated for MM to measure physical activity directly.
Methods: Three databases were searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL) up until 7th September 2023. Prospective studies using wearable devices to monitor physical activity in patients on treatment for MM were included. Bias across the studies was assessed using the CASP tool.
Results: Nine studies, with 220 patients on treatment for MM, were included. Only two studies had a low risk of bias. Different wearable device brands were used for varying lengths of time and were worn on either the wrist, upper arm, or chest. Adherence, reported in seven studies, ranged from 50% to 90%. Six studies reported an adherence greater than 75%. Although physical activity was also measured in a heterogenous manner, most studies reported reduced physical activity during treatment, associated with a higher symptom burden.
Conclusion: Monitoring patients receiving treatment for MM with a wearable device appears acceptable as an objective measure to evaluate physical activity. Due to the heterogeneity of the methods used, the generalisability of the results is limited. Future studies should explore the data collected prospectively and their ability to predict relevant clinical outcomes.