Evaluation of Activity Monitors in Controlled and Free-Living Environments
Evaluation of Activity Monitors in Controlled and Free-Living Environments
复制标题
DOI：
10.1249/mss.0b013e3182351913
复制
发表时间：
2012-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Thompson, Dixie L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Feito, Yuri;Bassett, David R.;Thompson, Dixie L.
题名/责任者：A.受控和自由生活环境中活动监测器的评估。地中海医院。准备好了。《体育运动》，第44卷，第4期，第733-741页，2012年。许多研究已经确定了计步器和加速计作为客观活动监测器的有用性。在实验室条件下，这些装置中的一些已经被证明提供准确和可靠的步骤测量。然而，关于这些设备在自由生活条件下的性能的数据有限。目的：1)比较5种不同的基于加速度计的活动监测器和计步器在跑步机上行走时速度和体重指数(BMI)对步数精度的影响；2)比较这些设备在自由生活环境中的性能；3)比较三代单个设备(Actigraph)与标准方法的步数。方法：6名受试者在进行跑步机步行(40、54、67、80和94m.min(-1))和自由生活活动1d时佩戴6个活动监测器。在跑步机上行走的步数是由研究者决定的步数，而在自由生活状态下步数的标准是StepWatch。结果：BMI对跑步机步行步数的准确性没有影响。StepWatch、ACTIVATIOPALI(TM)和AG7I64在所有速度下都是最准确的，而其余的设备只能在67英里分(-1)或更快的速度下准确。在自由生活环境中，AG7I64记录了99.5%+/-27%(平均值+/-SD)的StepWatch确定的步数。结论：我们证明BMI不会影响步行过程中常用活动监测器的步幅输出。此外，67英里·分钟(-1)似乎是准确计算步数所需的最低速度，至少对大多数腰装活动监测器来说是这样。最后，Step Watch、AG7164和ACTIVPAL(TM)是TM上最精确的设备，但在自由生活环境中，只有AG7164可以产生与StepWatch相当的步数。
FEITO, Y., D. R. BASSETT, and D. L. THOMPSON. Evaluation of Activity Monitors in Controlled and Free-Living Environments. Med. Set. Sports Exerc., Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 733-741, 2012. Numerous studies have established the usefulness of pedometers and accelerometers as objective activity monitors. Under laboratory conditions, some of these devices have been shown to provide accurate and reliable measures of steps. However, limited data exist on the performance of these devices under free-living conditions. Purpose: This study aimed 1) to compare the effects of speed and body mass index (BMI) on the step count accuracy of five different accelerometer-based activity monitors and a pedometer during treadmill walking, 2) to compare the performance of these devices in a free-living environment, and 3) to compare the step counts of three generations of a single device (ActiGraph) against a criterion method. Methods: Fitly-six individuals wore six activity monitors while performing treadmill walking (40, 54, 67, 80, and 94 m.min(-1)) and during 1 d of free-living activity. The criterion measure of steps during treadmill walking was investigator-determined steps, whereas the criterion measure of steps during the free-living condition was the StepWatch. Results: BMI had no effect on step count accuracy during treadmill walking. The StepWatch, activPALI (TM), and the AG7I64 were the most accurate across all speeds, whereas the remaining devices were only accurate at 67 m.min(-1) and faster. In the free-living environment, the AG7I64 recorded 99.5% +/- 27% (mean +/- SD) of StepWatch-determined steps. Conclusions: We demonstrated that BMI does not affect the step output of commonly used activity monitors during walking. In addition, 67 m.min(-1) seems to be the minimum speed required for accurate step counting, at least for most waist-mounted activity monitors. Finally, the Step Watch, AG7164, and activPAL (TM) were the most accurate devices on the TM, but only the AG7164 yielded comparable step counts to the StepWatch in the free-living environment.