Ka Man Tam1,2, Siu Yin Cheung2. 1. 1 Department of Hotel, Service & Tourism Studies, Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education , Kowloon, Hong Kong. 2. 2 Department of Physical Education, The Hong Kong Baptist University , Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of the step count measurement of commercial electronic activity monitor devices. Two popular models, Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2, were selected for treadmill walking in a single session. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty healthy volunteers walked at five predetermined speeds (0.90, 1.12, 1.33, 1.54, and 1.78 m/s) on a treadmill with both Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2 worn on their dominant hand's wrist. Observers counted the steps, with the aid of taped video, which was taken as the criterion measure for steps. The validity of the electronic activity devices was assessed by (1) Paired sample t test with the criterion measures and (2) Pearson's correlation coefficients and the corresponding p-values were calculated to compare the output of devices with manual step count. In addition, Bland-Altman plots were constructed to visually inspect the data and to assess agreement with the criterion measures. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in step measurement between Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2 with the criterion measures. Besides, there was a very strong agreement between step count measurements obtained using the Fitbit Charge HR (r = 0.99) and the Mi Band 2 (r = 0.99), at five predetermined speeds while comparing with the observed step counts. CONCLUSION: Both Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2 provided accurate step count measurement in the treadmill walking test.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of the step count measurement of commercial electronic activity monitor devices. Two popular models, Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2, were selected for treadmill walking in a single session. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty healthy volunteers walked at five predetermined speeds (0.90, 1.12, 1.33, 1.54, and 1.78 m/s) on a treadmill with both Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2 worn on their dominant hand's wrist. Observers counted the steps, with the aid of taped video, which was taken as the criterion measure for steps. The validity of the electronic activity devices was assessed by (1) Paired sample t test with the criterion measures and (2) Pearson's correlation coefficients and the corresponding p-values were calculated to compare the output of devices with manual step count. In addition, Bland-Altman plots were constructed to visually inspect the data and to assess agreement with the criterion measures. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in step measurement between Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2 with the criterion measures. Besides, there was a very strong agreement between step count measurements obtained using the Fitbit Charge HR (r = 0.99) and the Mi Band 2 (r = 0.99), at five predetermined speeds while comparing with the observed step counts. CONCLUSION: Both Fitbit Charge HR and Mi Band 2 provided accurate step count measurement in the treadmill walking test.
Entities:
Keywords:
e-health; mobile health; step count; telemedicine
Authors: Donovan J Lott; Tanja Taivassalo; Claudia R Senesac; Rebecca J Willcocks; Ann M Harrington; Kirsten Zilke; Hilary Cunkle; Catherine Powers; Erika L Finanger; William D Rooney; Gihan I Tennekoon; Krista Vandenborne Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2020-11-27 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: William Johnston; Pedro B Judice; Pablo Molina García; Jan M Mühlen; Esben Lykke Skovgaard; Julie Stang; Moritz Schumann; Shulin Cheng; Wilhelm Bloch; Jan Christian Brønd; Ulf Ekelund; Anders Grøntved; Brian Caulfield; Francisco B Ortega; Luis B Sardinha Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2020-12-24 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Guillaume Chevance; Natalie M Golaszewski; Elizabeth Tipton; Eric B Hekler; Matthew Buman; Gregory J Welk; Kevin Patrick; Job G Godino Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 4.947
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
Authors: Federico Germini; Noella Noronha; Victoria Borg Debono; Binu Abraham Philip; Drashti Pete; Tamara Navarro; Arun Keepanasseril; Sameer Parpia; Kerstin de Wit; Alfonso Iorio Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 5.428