Validation of Physical Activity Monitors in Individuals with Diabetes: Energy Expenditure Estimation by the Multisensor SenseWear Armband Pro3 and the Step Counter Omron HJ-720 Against Indirect Calorimetry During Walking
Validation of Physical Activity Monitors in Individuals with Diabetes: Energy Expenditure Estimation by the Multisensor SenseWear Armband Pro3 and the Step Counter Omron HJ-720 Against Indirect Calorimetry During Walking
复制标题
DOI：
10.1089/dia.2012.0235
复制
发表时间：
2013-05-01
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Slaby, Krystof
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Machac, Stanislav;Prochazka, Michal;Slaby, Krystof
背景资料：本研究的目的是测试SenseWear（R）臂带Pro 3（SWA）的能量消耗估计值与（BodyMedia，Pittsburgh，PA）和Omron HJ-720（Omron Healthcare，京都，日本）步计数器与间接测热法（IC）作为1型和2型糖尿病老年人在跑步机上行走时的金标准。总共有6名男性（60.3 ± 3.1岁）和13名女性（51.1 ± 11.0岁）患有1型或2型糖尿病。每名受试者在跑步机上进行三次15分钟的步行，速度和坡度的不同组合（3 km/h，0%; 4 km/h，0%; 5 km/h，5%）。能量消耗（EE）同时测量的SWA，欧姆龙，和IC。使用平均高估/低估和Pearson相关系数对测试方法和IC之间的一致性进行统计学评价。在3 km/h的速度和0%的坡度下，发现SWA的平均高估为+81.19 +/-23.81欧姆龙为+70.51 +/-20.91%（r = 0.77，P < 0.001）。在4km/h速度和0%坡度下，SWA的平均高估率为+78.18 ± 33.96%（r = 0.63，P < 0.01），Omron的平均高估率为+75.77 ± 33.36%（r = 0.52，P < 0.05）。在5 km/h速度和5%坡度的高强度运动水平下，SWA的平均低估率为-7.88 ± 16.86（r = 0.74，P < 0.001），欧姆龙为-7.37 +/- 16.07%结论：两种方法均明显高估了水平步行时的EE值，而低估了快速上坡步行时的EE值。
Background: The purpose of this study is to test the agreement between energy expenditure estimate of the SenseWear (R) Armband Pro3 (SWA) (BodyMedia, Pittsburgh, PA) and the Omron HJ-720 (Omron Healthcare, Kyoto, Japan) step counter with indirect calorimetry (IC) as a gold standard in older individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus while walking on a treadmill.Subjects and Methods: In total, six men (60.3 +/- 3.1 years old) and 13 women (51.1 +/- 11.0 years old) with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus were included in the study. Each subject performed three 15-min walking sessions with different combinations of speed and incline (3 km/h, 0%; 4 km/h, 0%; 5 km/h, 5%) on a treadmill. Energy expenditure (EE) was simultaneously measured by the SWA, Omron, and IC. Mean over-/underestimation and Pearson's correlation coefficients were used for statistical evaluation of the agreement between tested methods and IC.Results: At the speed of 3 km/h with 0% incline, mean overestimation of +81.19 +/- 23.81% was found for SWA (r = 0.79, P < 0.001) and +70.51 +/- 20.91% for Omron (r = 0.77, P < 0.001). At the speed of 4 km/h and 0% incline, mean overestimation found for SWA was +78.18 +/- 33.96% (r = 0.63, P < 0.01) and +75.77 +/- 33.36% for Omron (r = 0.52, P < 0.05). At the level of high-intensity exercise at the speed of 5 km/h and 5% incline, mean underestimation was -7.88 +/- 16.86% for SWA (r = 0.74, P < 0.001) and -7.37 +/- 16.07% for Omron (r = 0.75, P < 0.001).Conclusions: Both methods led to considerable overestimation of calculated EE in level walking and a relatively minor underestimation during fast uphill walking.