This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.

Wearable technology may not offer long-term weight loss advantage over standard intervention

Wearing devices that measure physical activity, in addition to standard weight management interventions, was less effective than receiving only the standard intervention at promoting long-term weight loss over 2 years, according to data published in JAMA.

“Overweight and obesity have high prevalence and are associated with numerous health conditions,” John Jakicic, PhD, of the University of Pittsburgh’s Physical Activity and Weight Management Research Center, and colleagues wrote. “Interventions emphasizing both diet and physical activity are effective for weight loss, resulting in 6-month weight loss of 8% to 10% of initial weight. However, challenges remain to sustaining weight loss long-term.”

To determine whether a technology-enhanced weight loss intervention would result in greater weight loss than a standard behavioral intervention alone, the researchers conducted a randomized clinical trial, enrolling 471 participants with a BMI from 25 to 40 between October 2010 and October 2012. Data collection was completed by December 2014.

All participants were placed on a low-calorie diet, prescribed increases in physical activity and attended group counseling sessions. At 6 months, telephone counseling sessions, text message prompts and access to online study materials were added to the interventions. Also at 6 months, participants randomly placed into the standard intervention group began self-monitoring diet and physical activity using a website. Meanwhile, those in the technology-enhanced group were provided with a commercially available wearable device, which included a web-based interface (Fit Core, produced by Body Media), to monitor diet and physical activity.

Participants weight was measured over 24 months, at 6-month intervals. Among the 471 participants, 470 — 233 in the standard group and 237 in the enhanced group — completed the interventions as randomized.

According to the researchers, there was significant change in weight over time (P < .001 for time), and the change at 24 months differed significantly between the two groups (2.4 kg difference; 95% CI, 1-3.7; P = .002). Estimated mean weights for the enhanced group were 96.3 kg at baseline, and 92.8 kg at 24 months (95% CI, 90.6-95), resulting in a mean weight loss of 3.5 kg (95% CI, 2.6-4.5). Among the standard group, estimated mean weights were 95.2 kg at baseline, and 89.3 kg at 24 months (95% CI, 87.1-91.5), for a mean weight loss of 5.9 kg (95% CI, 5-6.8). In addition, both groups had significant improvements in body composition, fitness, physical activity and diet, with no significant differences between them.

“Among young adults with a BMI between 25 and less than 40, the additional of a wearable technology device to a standard behavioral intervention resulted in less weight loss over 24 months,” Jakicic and colleagues wrote. “Devices that monitor and provide feedback on physical activity may not offer an advantage over standard behavioral weight loss approaches.” – by Jason Laday

Disclosure: Jakicic reports receiving an honorarium for serving on the Scientific Advisory Board for Weight Watchers International, serving as a principal investigator on a grant to test the validity of activity monitors awarded to the University of Pittsburgh by Jawbone Inc., and serving as a co-investigator on grants awarded to the University of Pittsburgh by HumanScale, Weight Watchers International and Ethicon/Covidien. See the full study for additional researchers’ disclosures.