A qualitative examination of the factors affecting the adoption of injury focused wearable technologies in recreational runners

Abstract

Purpose Understanding the perceived efficacy and ease of use of technologies will influence initial adoption and sustained utilization. The objectives of this study were to determine the metrics deemed important by runners for monitoring running-related injury (RRI) risk, and identify the facilitators and barriers to their use of injury focused wearable technologies. Methods A qualitative focus group study was undertaken. Nine semi-structured focus groups with male (n = 13) and female (n = 14) recreational runners took place. Focus groups were audio and video recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were thematically analysed. A critical friend approach was taken to data coding, and multiple methods of trustworthiness were executed. Results Excessive loading and inadequate recovery were deemed the most important risk factors to monitor for RRI risk. Other important factors included training activities, injury status and history, and running technique. The location and method of attachment of a wearable device, the design of a smartphone application, and receiving useful injury-related information will affect recreational runners’ adoption of injury focused technologies. Conclusions Overtraining, training-related and individual-related risk factors are essential metrics that need to be monitored for RRI risk. RRI apps should include the metrics deemed important by runners, once there is supporting evidence-based research. The difficulty and/or ease of use of a device, and receiving useful feedback will influence the adoption of injury focused running technologies. There is a clear willingness from recreational runners to adopt injury focused wearable technologies whilst running.

“Another world of pain” – Athlete and Sport Physiotherapist perspectives on the unique experience of pain in sport

“…In line with contemporary research, pain experience existed along a spectrum for athletes and physiotherapists alike who described a variety of pain presentations from routine training-related muscle soreness, to “niggles”, to pain that is more sinister and may be a cause for concern. 24 Pain perception has both sensory and emotional aspects that, participants described, are influenced by a multitude of sports-related activities from a routine warm-up to the rush of adrenalin and intense focus experienced when competing. 22 This situational and contextual pain perception served the purpose of deferring the pain experience and facilitating athletes’ performance during competition. “It kind of has physical implications and psychological as well yeah”.…”

The Effect of Wearable-Based Real-Time Feedback on Running Injuries and Running Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…We explored the reasons for discontinued use because a better understanding of this may assist in ensuring more successful uptake in the future. 35 Reasons for discontinuation differed between the groups, with the primary reason for discontinuation in the control group being that they did not understand the feedback provided in the application upon session completion. As the feedback upon session completion for the control group provided only an overview of the recorded biomechanical metrics without advice on how to use them, this illustrates the importance of feedback that specifies how to use the recorded metrics to optimize performance/health or minimize injury risk to ensure adoption in practice.…”

Effects of Peer- or Professional-Led Support in Enhancing Adherence to Wearable Monitoring Devices Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

“…Nonadherence to WMDs affects the completeness of health data and impairs early detection of the aggravation of a disease, which will eventually have a negative impact on the health of users [6]. Previous studies indicated that the characteristics of a WMD, such as its ease of use, size, security and privacy setting, and maintenance cost, as well as the characteristics of older adults, such as their technological competence and perception of the usefulness of the WMD, are some factors that may influence the intention of users to keep using the WMD [5,[7][8][9].…”

“…This study focused on assessing how well participants adhered to a specific intervention or treatment program rather than on specifically evaluating adherence to WMDs. Furthermore, most of the cross-sectional studies identified in the systematic review concentrated on investigating the reasons and factors influencing the use or nonuse of WMDs by older adults [5,7,9,[24][25][26]. These studies aimed to understand the barriers and facilitators associated with older adults' adoption and acceptance of WMDs but did not explore how older adults can sustain the use of WMDs over an extended period.…”