IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i13p4807-d380118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Everyday Pedelec Use and Its Effect on Meeting Physical Activity Guidelines

Author

Listed:
  • Hedwig T. Stenner

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Johanna Boyen

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Markus Hein

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Gudrun Protte

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Momme Kück

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Armin Finkel

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Alexander A. Hanke

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

  • Uwe Tegtbur

    (Institute of Sports Medicine, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hanover, Germany)

Abstract

Pedelecs (e-bikes with electrical support up to 25 km·h −1 ) are important in active transportation. Yet, little is known about physiological responses during their everyday use. We compared daily pedelec (P) and bicycle (B) use to determine if pedelecs are a suitable tool to enhance physical activity. In 101 employees, cycling duration and intensity, heart rate (HR) during P and B were recorded via a smartphone app. Each recording period was a randomized crossover design and lasted two weeks. The ride quantity was higher in P compared to B (5.3 ± 4.3 vs. 3.2 ± 4.0 rides·wk −1 ; p < 0.001) resulting in a higher total cycling time per week for P (174 ± 146 min·wk −1 ) compared to B (99 ± 109 min·wk −1 ; p < 0.001). The mean HR during P was lower than B (109 ± 14 vs. 118 ± 17 bpm; p < 0.001). The perceived exertion was lower in P (11.7 ± 1.8 vs. 12.8 ± 2.1 in B; p < 0.001). The weekly energy expenditure was higher during P than B (717 ± 652 vs. 486 ± 557 metabolic equivalents of the task [MET]·min·wk −1 ; p < 0.01). Due to a sufficient HR increase in P, pedelecs offer a more active form of transportation to enhance physical activity.

Suggested Citation

  • Hedwig T. Stenner & Johanna Boyen & Markus Hein & Gudrun Protte & Momme Kück & Armin Finkel & Alexander A. Hanke & Uwe Tegtbur, 2020. "Everyday Pedelec Use and Its Effect on Meeting Physical Activity Guidelines," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-9, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:13:p:4807-:d:380118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/13/4807/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/13/4807/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geoffrey Rose, 2012. "E-bikes and urban transportation: emerging issues and unresolved questions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 81-96, January.
    2. Solveig Nordengen & Denise Christina Ruther & Amund Riiser & Lars Bo Andersen & Ane Solbraa, 2019. "Correlates of Commuter Cycling in Three Norwegian Counties," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jenkins, Michael & Lustosa, Lucio & Chia, Victoria & Wildish, Sarah & Tan, Maria & Hoornweg, Daniel & Lloyd, Meghann & Dogra, Shilpa, 2022. "What do we know about pedal assist E-bikes? A scoping review to inform future directions," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 25-37.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ziwen Ling & Christopher R. Cherry & John H. MacArthur & Jonathan X. Weinert, 2017. "Differences of Cycling Experiences and Perceptions between E-Bike and Bicycle Users in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Synek, Stefan & Koenigstorfer, Joerg, 2018. "Exploring adoption determinants of tax-subsidized company-leasing bicycles from the perspective of German employers and employees," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 238-260.
    3. Tuğba Yeğin & Muhammad Ikram, 2022. "Analysis of Consumers’ Electric Vehicle Purchase Intentions: An Expansion of the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Thomas, Alainna, 2016. "A More Sustainable Minivan? An Exploratory Study of Electric Bicycle Use by San Francisco Bay Area Families," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6g79m3xx, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    5. Wafa Elias & Victoria Gitelman, 2018. "Youngsters’ Opinions and Attitudes toward the Use of Electric Bicycles in Israel," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Paul Plazier & Gerd Weitkamp & Agnes van den Berg, 2023. "E-bikes in rural areas: current and potential users in the Netherlands," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 1449-1470, August.
    7. Jibiao Zhou & Tao Zheng & Sheng Dong & Xinhua Mao & Changxi Ma, 2022. "Impact of Helmet-Wearing Policy on E-Bike Safety Riding Behavior: A Bivariate Ordered Probit Analysis in Ningbo, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-21, February.
    8. Jurgis Zagorskas & Marija Burinskienė, 2019. "Challenges Caused by Increased Use of E-Powered Personal Mobility Vehicles in European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. G. Marletto, 2013. "Car and the city: Socio-technical pathways to 2030," Working Paper CRENoS 201306, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    10. Jadwiga Biegańska & Elżbieta Grzelak-Kostulska & Michał Adam Kwiatkowski, 2021. "A Typology of Attitudes towards the E-Bike against the Background of the Traditional Bicycle and the Car," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Sarmad Zaman Rajper & Johan Albrecht, 2020. "Prospects of Electric Vehicles in the Developing Countries: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, March.
    12. Jin, Sheng & Qu, Xiaobo & Zhou, Dan & Xu, Cheng & Ma, Dongfang & Wang, Dianhai, 2015. "Estimating cycleway capacity and bicycle equivalent unit for electric bicycles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 225-248.
    13. Wells, Peter & Lin, Xiao, 2015. "Spontaneous emergence versus technology management in sustainable mobility transitions: Electric bicycles in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 371-383.
    14. Georgia Apostolou & Angèle Reinders & Karst Geurs, 2018. "An Overview of Existing Experiences with Solar-Powered E-Bikes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, August.
    15. Sylwia Agata Bęczkowska & Iwona Grabarek & Zuzanna Zysk & Katarzyna Gosek-Ferenc, 2022. "Physical Activity and Ecological Means of Transport—Functional Assessment Methodology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-15, July.
    16. van Lierop, D. & Soemers, J. & Hoeke, L. & Liu, G. & Chen, Z. & Ettema, D. & Kruijf, J., 2020. "Wayfinding for cycle highways: Assessing e-bike users' experiences with wayfinding along a cycle highway in the Netherlands," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    17. José Castillo-Manzano & Antonio Sánchez-Braza, 2013. "Managing a smart bicycle system when demand outstrips supply: the case of the university community in Seville," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 459-477, February.
    18. Laa, Barbara & Leth, Ulrich, 2020. "Survey of E-scooter users in Vienna: Who they are and how they ride," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    19. Ni, Ying & Li, Yixin & Yuan, Yufei & Sun, Jian, 2023. "An operational simulation framework for modelling the multi-interaction of two-wheelers on mixed-traffic road segments," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 611(C).
    20. Zhao, Chunli & Nielsen, Thomas Alexander Sick & Olafsson, Anton Stahl & Carstensen, Trine Agervig & Meng, Xiaoying, 2018. "Urban form, demographic and socio-economic correlates of walking, cycling, and e-biking: Evidence from eight neighborhoods in Beijing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 102-112.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:13:p:4807-:d:380118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.