Increasing Walking Following Cardiac Rehabilitation

This study is currently recruiting participants.

Verified by University of Alberta, Physical Education, January 2006

First Received: January 20, 2006 Last Updated: March 8, 2007 History of Changes

Sponsored by:	University of Alberta, Physical Education
Information provided by:	University of Alberta, Physical Education
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:	NCT00281424

Purpose

The purpose of the project was to test the widely endorsed assumption that pedometers produce or encourage more physical activity participation in the form of walking. The investigators hypothesized that pedometers would not increase the amount of walking cardiac patients participated in after their cardiac rehabilitation program compared to patients without pedometers.

Condition	Intervention	Phase
Cardiac Diseases Walking	Behavioral: pedometer	Phase II Phase III

MedlinePlus related topics: Heart Diseases Rehabilitation

U.S. FDA Resources

Study Type:	Interventional
Study Design:	Treatment, Randomized, Open Label, Active Control, Parallel Assignment, Efficacy Study
Official Title:	Increasing Walking Following Completion of Cardiac Rehabilitation

Further study details as provided by University of Alberta, Physical Education:

Primary Outcome Measures:

Physical activity behaviour

Estimated Enrollment:	225
Study Start Date:	June 2005

Detailed Description:

As evidenced by the media attention given to pedometers and recent physical activity promotional efforts focused on pedometers, people seem to think that owning a pedometer will influence activity levels.

However, an examination of a few social cognitive theories produces no theoretical rationale that would support any sustained positive influence of pedometers in the absence of some other conditional factor, such as a behavioural goal or a social support system. We believe that once people determine how many steps their usual routes and daily activity typically amounts to, that the pedometer will no longer be used. We based our contentions on two theories: self efficacy theory (Bandura, 1986;1997) and self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Eligibility

Genders Eligible for Study:	Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:	No

Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

All patients referred to the Northern Alberta Cardiac Rehabilitation Program
Patients who are willing to participate
Are able to read English
Patients who are able to walk at 2.0 mph based on their exercise stress test results

Contacts and Locations

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00281424

Contacts

Contact: Wendy M Rodgers, PhD	780-492-2677	wendy.rodgers@ualberta.ca
Contact: Lea A Carlyle, BKin	780-492-7424	lcarlyle@ualberta.ca

Locations

Canada, Alberta
Glenrose Rehabilitation Hospital	Recruiting
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6H 1X5
Contact: Bill Daub, MSc 780-492-8206

Sponsors and Collaborators

University of Alberta, Physical Education

Investigators

Principal Investigator:

Wendy M Rodgers, PhD

University of Alberta

More Information

No publications provided

Study ID Numbers:	B-080105
Study First Received:	January 20, 2006
Last Updated:	March 8, 2007
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:	NCT00281424 History of Changes
Health Authority:	Canada: Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Keywords provided by University of Alberta, Physical Education:

exercise adherence
cardiac patients
walking

Study placed in the following topic categories:

Heart Diseases

Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Heart Diseases
Cardiovascular Diseases

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on May 07, 2009