Abhishek K Singh1, Craig Farmer2, Maayken L E Van Den Berg1, Maggie Killington1, Christopher J Barr3. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Aged and Extended Care, School of Health Sciences, Flinders University, South Australia, Australia. 2. Department of Physiotherapy, Repatriation General Hospital, South Australia, Australia. 3. Department of Rehabilitation Aged and Extended Care, School of Health Sciences, Flinders University, South Australia, Australia. Electronic address: Chris.Barr@flinders.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Activity monitoring is used for motivation and assessing patients in the rehabilitation setting. Monitors available on the market have not been assessed for accuracy at walking patterns seen in the clinical setting. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of the Fitbit Zip device at different anatomical locations at walking speeds, step length, and cadence similar to those seen in clinical rehabilitation populations. METHODS: Ten healthy participants completed 3 sets of 12 combinations of speed and cadence ranging from 0.2 m/s at 48 steps per minute to 1.0 m/s at 120 steps per minute along a 20 m walkway. Step length was controlled by ground markings and cadence was controlled by a metronome. Five Fitbit Zip devices were concurrently worn at the chest, hip, shin, ankle and forefoot. Percent accuracy for each location and walking condition combination were calculated. RESULTS: At the chest and hip the Fitbit has poor accuracy below 0.7 m/s, however when worn distally, can be accurate to 5.5% at speeds as slow as 0.5 m/s. CONCLUSIONS: For patient populations with slow walking speed, activity monitoring with the Fitbit can be achieved provided the device is located distally on the lower limb.
BACKGROUND: Activity monitoring is used for motivation and assessing patients in the rehabilitation setting. Monitors available on the market have not been assessed for accuracy at walking patterns seen in the clinical setting. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of the Fitbit Zip device at different anatomical locations at walking speeds, step length, and cadence similar to those seen in clinical rehabilitation populations. METHODS: Ten healthy participants completed 3 sets of 12 combinations of speed and cadence ranging from 0.2 m/s at 48 steps per minute to 1.0 m/s at 120 steps per minute along a 20 m walkway. Step length was controlled by ground markings and cadence was controlled by a metronome. Five Fitbit Zip devices were concurrently worn at the chest, hip, shin, ankle and forefoot. Percent accuracy for each location and walking condition combination were calculated. RESULTS: At the chest and hip the Fitbit has poor accuracy below 0.7 m/s, however when worn distally, can be accurate to 5.5% at speeds as slow as 0.5 m/s. CONCLUSIONS: For patient populations with slow walking speed, activity monitoring with the Fitbit can be achieved provided the device is located distally on the lower limb.
Authors: Andrea L Hergenroeder; Bethany Barone Gibbs; Mary P Kotlarczyk; Subashan Perera; Robert J Kowalsky; Jennifer S Brach Journal: J Aging Phys Act Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Marc A Adams; Jane C Hurley; Michael Todd; Nishat Bhuiyan; Catherine L Jarrett; Wesley J Tucker; Kevin E Hollingshead; Siddhartha S Angadi Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Charlotte Brun Thorup; Jan Jesper Andreasen; Erik Elgaard Sørensen; Mette Grønkjær; Birthe Irene Dinesen; John Hansen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-03-31 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Valerie J Block; Chao Zhao; Jill A Hollenbach; Jeffrey E Olgin; Gregory M Marcus; Mark J Pletcher; Roland Henry; Jeffrey M Gelfand; Bruce Ac Cree Journal: Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin Date: 2019-11-21
Authors: Daniel Fuller; Emily Colwell; Jonathan Low; Kassia Orychock; Melissa Ann Tobin; Bo Simango; Richard Buote; Desiree Van Heerden; Hui Luan; Kimberley Cullen; Logan Slade; Nathan G A Taylor Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 4.773