Accuracy of uploadable pedometers in laboratory, overground, and free-living conditions in young and older adults

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Scott J Strath²  Elizabeth K Lenz¹  Nora E Miller²  Ann M Swartz²  Christopher J Dondzila² 

[1] The College at Brockport, State University of New York, 350 New Campus Dr., Brockport, NY, 14420, USA;Physical Activity and Health Research Laboratory, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI, 53201, USA

关键词: Motion sensor;    Accuracy;    Precision;    Step-counter;    Walking;   

Others  :  811283
DOI  :  10.1186/1479-5868-9-143

 received in 2011-11-08, accepted in 2012-11-07,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of uploadable pedometers to accurately count steps during treadmill (TM) and overground (OG) walking, and during a 24 hour monitoring period (24 hr) under free living conditions in young and older adults.

Methods

One hundred and two participants (n=53 aged 20–49 yrs; n=49 aged 50–80 yrs) completed a TM protocol (53.6, 67.0, 80.4, 93.8, and 107.2 m/min, five minutes for each speed) and an OG walking protocol (self-determined “< normal”, “normal”, and “> normal” walking speeds) while wearing two waist-mounted uploadable pedometers (Omron HJ-720ITC [OM] and Kenz Lifecorder EX [LC]). Actual steps were manually tallied by a researcher. During the 24 hr period, participants wore a New Lifestyles-1000 (NL) pedometer (standard of care) attached to a belt at waist level over the midline of the left thigh, in addition to the LC on the belt over the midline of the right thigh. The following day, the same procedure was conducted, replacing the LC with the OM. One-sample t-tests were performed to compare measured and manually tallied steps during the TM and OG protocols, and between steps quantified by the NL with that of the OM and LC during the 24 hr period. Mean error step scores (MES, criterion – device) and 95% Limits of Agreement (LoA) were calculated.

Results

There were no significant differences between the OM and tallied steps for any of the TM speeds for either the young or older adult groups. The LC significantly underestimated steps for the young adult group during the 53.6 m/min TM speed (MES 31.4 [14.5, 48.3]) and during the OG < normal walking speed (MES 12.0 [0.9, 23.1] (p<0.01 for both age groups). The LC also significantly underestimated steps for the older adult group during the TM speeds of 53.6 m/min (MES 64.5 [45.6, 83.4]), 67.0 m/min (MES 15.1 [6.1, 24.0]), and 80.4 m/min (MES 3.2 [0.6, 5.9]) (p<0.01 for all speeds), in addition to the OG < normal walking speed (MES 14.7 [−13.3, 42.6] (p<0.01). The OM reported significantly lower steps during the 24 hr period for the young adult group by 949.1 steps (t=6.111, p<0.025) and for the older adult group by 612.9 steps (t=2.397, p<0.025).

Conclusion

Both the OM and LC pedometers were more accurate as TM and OG walking speed increased. The OM significantly underestimated steps during the 24 hr compared with a standard of care evaluation. Overall, both uploadable pedometers appear acceptable to use in young or old age groups to measure walking behavior.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Dondzila et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, Macera CA, Heath GW, Thompson PD, Bauman A: Physical Activity and Public Health: Updated Recommendations for Adults From the American College of Sports Medicine and American Heart Association. Circ 2007, 116:1081-1093.
• [2]Moreau KL, Degarmo R, Langley J, McMahon C, Howley ET, Basset DR, Thompson DL: Increasing daily walking lowers blood pressure in postmenopausal women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001, 33:1825-1831.
• [3]Talbot LA, Gaines JM, Huynh TN, Metter EJ: A home-based pedometer-driven walking program to increase physical activity in older adults with osteoarthritis of the knee: a preliminary study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003, 51:387-392.
• [4]Schneider PL, Bassett DR Jr, Thompson DL, Pronk NP, Bielak KM: Effects of a 10,000 steps per day goal in overweight adults. Am J Health Promot 2006, 21:85-89.
• [5]Richardson CR, Buis LR, Janney AW, Goodrich DE, Sen A, Hess ML, Mehari KS, Fortlage LA, Resnick PJ, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Strecher VJ, Piette JD: An Online Community Improves Adherence in an Internet-Mediated Walking Program. Part 1: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res 2010, 12:e71.
• [6]Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Karabulut M, Bassett DR Jr: Validity of 10 Electronic Pedometers for Measuring Steps, Distance, and Energy Cost. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003, 35:1455-1460.
• [7]Schneider PL, Crouter SE, Bassett DR Jr: Pedometer Measures of Free-Living Physical Activity: Comparison of 13 Models. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004, 36:331-335.
• [8]Kang M, Bassett DR, Barreira TV, Tudor-Locke C, Ainsworth B, Reis JP, Strath S, Swartz A: How many days are enough? A study of 365 days of pedometer monitoring. Res Q Exerc Sport 2009, 80:445-453.
• [9]Cyarto EV, Myers AM, Tudor-Locke C: Pedometer Accuracy in Nursing Home and Community-Dwelling Older Adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004, 36:205-209.
• [10]Grant PM, Dall PM, Mitchell SL, Granat MH: Activity-monitor accuracy in measuring step number and cadence in community-dwelling older adults. J Aging Phys Act 2008, 16:201-214.
• [11]Storti KL, Pettee KK, Brach JS, Talkowski J, Richardson CR, Kriska AM: Gait Speed and Step-Count Monitor Accuracy in Community-Dwelling Older Adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008, 40:59-64.
• [12]Schneider PL, Crouter SE, Lukajic O, Bassett DR Jr: Accuracy and Reliability of Pedometers for Measuring Steps over a 400-m Walk. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003, 35:1779-1784.
• [13]Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Bassett DR Jr: Spring-Levered versus Peizo-Electric Pedometer Accuracy in Overweight and Obese Adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37:1673-1679.
• [14]ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription, Eighth edition Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010.
• [15]Samson MM, Crowe A, de Vreede PL, Dessens JAG, Duursma SA, Verhaar HJJ: Differences in gait parameters at a preferred walking speed in healthy subjects due to age, height and body weight. Aging Clin Exp Res 2001, 13:16-21.
• [16]Le Masurier GC, Lee SM, Tudor-Locke C: Motion Sensor Accuracy under Controlled and Free-Living Conditions. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004, 36:905-910.
• [17]Foster RC, Lanningham-Foster LM, Manohar C, McCrady SK, Nysse LJ, Kaufman KR, Padgett DJ, Levine JA: Precision and accuracy of an ankle-worn accelerometer-based pedometer in step counting and energy expenditure. Prev Med 2005, 41:778-783.
• [18]Hasson RE, Jaller J, Pober DM, Staudenmayer J, Freedson PS: Validity of the Omron HJ-112 pedometer during treadmill walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009, 41:805-809.
• [19]Giannakidou DM, Kambas A, Ageloussis N, Fatouros I, Christoforidis C, Venetsanou F, Douroudos I, Taxildaris K: The validity of two Omron pedometers during treadmill walking is speed dependent. Eur J Appl Physiol 2011. epub ahead of print
• [20]Abel MG, Hannon JC, Sell K, Lillie T, Conlin G, Anderson D: Validation of the Kenz Lifecorder EX and ActiGraph GT1M accelerometers for walking and running in adults. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2008, 33:1155-1164.
• [21]Holbrook EA, Barreira TV, Kang M: Validity and Reliability of Omron Pedometers for Prescribed and Self-Paced Walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009, 41:669-673.
• [22]Silcott NA, Bassett DR Jr, Thompson DL, Fitzhugh EC, Steeves JA: Evaluation of the Omron HJ-720ITC Pedometer under Free-Living Conditions. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 43:1791-1797.