Always Ready. Always Safe. Learn More About Our Health and Safety Protocols.corona close
Skip to main content

Study: As Few as 1-2 Days of 8,000 Steps Can Lower Mortality Risk

Researchers found that all-cause mortality risk dropped even when daily step goals weren’t being met consistently.

The Message

Getting in a sufficient number of steps per day is associated with lower mortality risk, but what happens when daily goals are only met part of the time? Researchers who linked an accelerometer study from 2005-2006 to deaths 10 years later say that they’ve found a dose-response relationship indicating that reaching an 8,000-step goal only one or two days a week can significantly reduce risk of all-cause and cardiovascular disease-related mortality, with those risks continuing to fall until participants met this step goal four days a week. The findings, they write, are promising for individuals who may have difficulty exercising regularly.

The Study

Researchers collected accelerometer data from 3,101 participants in the 2005 and 2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The steps portion of the survey asked participants to wear a waist accelerometer for a week during waking hours. For this study, authors included participants with data indicating that they wore the device for 10 hours or more at least four days during the week surveyed, with participants divided into three groups according to the number of days they took 8,000 steps or more: zero days, one to two days, and three to seven days. Researchers then compared steps data with deaths over a 10-year period drawn from the National Death Index, a databank that contains identifying information including Social Security numbers, name, and date of birth, as well as demographic characteristics.

Participants

The average age of the participants in the survey was 50.5, and the cohort was nearly evenly divided between women (51%) and men (49%). White participants comprised half of the study group, with Black, Hispanic, and other race and ethnicity individuals making up 21.5%, 23.7%, and 3.9%, respectively.

In terms of steps taken, 20.4% never reached 8,000 steps or more during the week, 17.2% hit the 8,000-step goal one to two days during the week, and 62.5% recorded 8,000 or more steps three to seven days during the week. Those with higher step numbers tended to be men, younger, Hispanic, married, and never-smokers.

Findings

Overall, during the 10-year period after the survey, all-cause deaths were recorded among 14.2% of participants, with 5.3% of those deaths related to cardiovascular disease.

Compared with the zero-days group, participants who recorded one to two days a week of 8,000 steps or more registered a 14.9% lower all-cause 10-year mortality risk, and an 8.1% lower risk of cardiovascular disease-related death. Risk reduction for this group was recorded across age groups and among both men and women.

Participants who recorded three to seven days of 8,000 steps or more were associated with a 16.5% lower all-cause mortality risk compared with the zero-days group and an 8.4% lower risk of cardiovascular disease-related death.

The dose-response plateaued when participants recorded three days of 8,000 steps, with more 8,000-step days not associated with significantly lower mortality risk. Likewise, analysis of the protective nature of steps didn’t vary much by quantity between 6,000- and 10,000-step limits.

Why It Matters…

While the rise of wearables has made step-counting an easy way to monitor physical activity — and added an element of gamification that can keep motivation up — authors point out that not everyone is capable of registering a consistently ideal number of steps daily. Rather than posting the achievement of step goals as an all-or-nothing proposition, the current study reveals that “people may receive substantial health benefits even if a sufficient number of steps are taken only a couple days of the week,” they write.

Keep in Mind…

While authors see strengths in their study’s use of objective measurement of steps and a solid linkage to death data, they acknowledge several limitations of their research. Among them: lack of data on how changes to physical activity may have affected mortality, accelerometer measurement error, the possibility that participants might’ve been more active than normal because they were wearing a device, the use of self-reported data on socioeconomic status and health history, and the absence of analysis of specific-cause mortality other than cardiovascular.

Article courtesy of APTA