Digital Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Interventions for Community-Living Adults: Umbrella Review.

Abstract

Background: Digital interventions hold significant potential for improving physical activity (PA) and reducing sedentary behavior (SB) in adults. Despite increasing interest, there remain surprising gaps in the current knowledge of how best to deliver these interventions, including incorporating appropriate theoretical frameworks and behavior change techniques. Following numerous systematic reviews, there is now significant potential for umbrella reviews to provide an overview of the current evidence.

Objective: This umbrella review aimed to explore digital PA and SB interventions for community-living adults across effectiveness, key components, and methodological quality.

Methods: This review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute framework for umbrella reviews. Key search terms were developed iteratively, incorporating physical and sedentary activity alongside digital interventions. We searched 7 online databases (Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Inspec, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE [Ovid], and PROSPERO) alongside gray literature databases. Information was extracted and tabulated from each included article on intervention effectiveness, key components, and content acknowledging both the digital and human elements. The study quality was appraised using A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2). The corrected covered area method was used to assess the overlap of primary studies included in the systematic reviews. All relevant research findings were extracted and reported.

Results: Search terms identified 330 articles, of which 5 (1.5%) met the inclusion criteria. The most common PA outcomes identified were daily steps, moderate-to-vigorous PA, total PA, and PA change. Reviews with meta-analysis reported that digital interventions improved multiple PA outcomes (daily steps, moderate-to-vigorous PA time, and total PA time). However, findings from the remaining systematic reviews were mixed. Similarly, the findings for SB were contrasting. Regarding intervention components, monitor- and sensor-only intervention delivery methods were most frequently implemented. Eleven theoretical frameworks were identified, with social cognitive theory being the most prominent theory. In total, 28 different behavior change techniques were reported, with goal setting, self-monitoring, feedback, and social support being the most frequently used. All 5 systematic reviews were of low or critically low quality, each incorporating unique primary studies (corrected covered area=0%).

Conclusions: This umbrella review highlights the potential of digital interventions to increase PA and reduce SB among community-living adults. However, the disparate nature of current academic knowledge means potentially efficacious research may not realistically translate to real work impact. Our review identified a lack of consensus around outcomes and components at both individual (eg, difficult to collate and compare findings) and multiple study (poor reported quality of systematic reviews) levels. Collective, concerted action is required to standardize outcomes and improve systematic review reporting to optimize future learning around digital interventions to increase PA and reduce SB in community-living adults, including traditionally overlooked populations, like informal carers.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42023450773; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023450773.