Mirko Brandes1, Dieter Rosenbaum. 1. Movement Analysis Lab, Orthopaedic Department, University Hospital Muenster, Münster 48149, Germany. mib@uni-muenster.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate correlations between the DynaPort activity of daily living monitor and the step activity monitor. DESIGN: Experimental study with repeated measures. BACKGROUND: Physical activity becomes more important to assess quality of life, e.g. after clinical interventions such as joint replacement surgery. METHODS: Nine subjects wore both devices simultaneously for two days. Limitations and technical problems caused by the devices were assessed by a questionnaire. Correlation coefficients were calculated between parameters derived from both instruments. RESULTS: Only small limitations and problems were reported. Significant correlations were found between the number of steps (step activity monitor) and the percentage of locomotion (DynaPort) (r=0.95), between the number of steps and the physical activity index (DynaPort) (r=0.71) and between the physical activity index and the percentage of locomotion (r=0.76). Wilcoxon-tests between the first and second measurement of each subject did not reveal significant differences but correlation coefficients were poor (r=0.16-0.36). CONCLUSIONS: After one day of simultaneously wearing both devices, the percentage of locomotion can be obtained using only the step activity monitor for additional days. Poor correlations between the first and the second measurements of each subject underline the necessity to record further days to acquire the level of human physical activity.
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to evaluate correlations between the DynaPort activity of daily living monitor and the step activity monitor. DESIGN: Experimental study with repeated measures. BACKGROUND: Physical activity becomes more important to assess quality of life, e.g. after clinical interventions such as joint replacement surgery. METHODS: Nine subjects wore both devices simultaneously for two days. Limitations and technical problems caused by the devices were assessed by a questionnaire. Correlation coefficients were calculated between parameters derived from both instruments. RESULTS: Only small limitations and problems were reported. Significant correlations were found between the number of steps (step activity monitor) and the percentage of locomotion (DynaPort) (r=0.95), between the number of steps and the physical activity index (DynaPort) (r=0.71) and between the physical activity index and the percentage of locomotion (r=0.76). Wilcoxon-tests between the first and second measurement of each subject did not reveal significant differences but correlation coefficients were poor (r=0.16-0.36). CONCLUSIONS: After one day of simultaneously wearing both devices, the percentage of locomotion can be obtained using only the step activity monitor for additional days. Poor correlations between the first and the second measurements of each subject underline the necessity to record further days to acquire the level of human physical activity.
Authors: Marie-Kathrin Breyer; Robab Breyer-Kohansal; Georg-Christian Funk; Nicole Dornhofer; Martijn A Spruit; Emiel F M Wouters; Otto C Burghuber; Sylvia Hartl Journal: Respir Res Date: 2010-08-22
Authors: Hans Van Remoortel; Santiago Giavedoni; Yogini Raste; Chris Burtin; Zafeiris Louvaris; Elena Gimeno-Santos; Daniel Langer; Alastair Glendenning; Nicholas S Hopkinson; Ioannis Vogiatzis; Barry T Peterson; Frederick Wilson; Bridget Mann; Roberto Rabinovich; Milo A Puhan; Thierry Troosters Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2012-07-09 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Flávia Roberta Rocha; Ana Karla Vieira Brüggemann; Davi de Souza Francisco; Caroline Semprebom de Medeiros; Danielle Rosal; Elaine Paulin Journal: J Bras Pneumol Date: 2017 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.624
Authors: Kieran P Dowd; Robert Szeklicki; Marco Alessandro Minetto; Marie H Murphy; Angela Polito; Ezio Ghigo; Hidde van der Ploeg; Ulf Ekelund; Janusz Maciaszek; Rafal Stemplewski; Maciej Tomczak; Alan E Donnelly Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 6.457