BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Advances in technology continue to provide numerous options for physical activity assessment. These advances necessitate evaluation of the validity of newly developed activity monitors being used in clinical and research settings. The purpose of this study was to validate the SenseWear Pro3 Armband (SWA) step counts during treadmill walking and free-living conditions. METHODS: Study 1 observed 39 individuals (17 males, 22 females) wearing an SWA and a Yamax Digiwalker SW-701 pedometer (DIGI) during treadmill walking, utilizing manually counted steps as the criterion. Study 2 compared free-living step count data from 35 participants (17 males, 18 females) wearing the SWA and DIGI (comparison) for 3 consecutive days. RESULTS: During Study 1, the SWA underestimated steps by 16.0%, 10.7%, 5.6%, 6.1%, and 6.5% at speeds of 54 m/min, 67 m/min, 80 m/min, 94 m/min, and 107 m/min, respectively, compared to manually counted steps. During Study 2, the intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient of mean steps/d between the SWA and DIGI was strong (r = 0.98, p < 0.001). Unlike Study 1, the SWA overestimated step counts during the 3-day wear period by an average of 1028 steps/d (or +11.3%) compared to the DIGI. When analyzed individually, the SWA consistently overestimated step counts for each day (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The SWA underestimates steps during treadmill walking and appears to overestimate steps during free-living compared to the DIGI pedometer. Caution is warranted when using the SWA to count steps. Modifications are needed to enhance step counting accuracy.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Advances in technology continue to provide numerous options for physical activity assessment. These advances necessitate evaluation of the validity of newly developed activity monitors being used in clinical and research settings. The purpose of this study was to validate the SenseWear Pro3 Armband (SWA) step counts during treadmill walking and free-living conditions. METHODS: Study 1 observed 39 individuals (17 males, 22 females) wearing an SWA and a Yamax Digiwalker SW-701 pedometer (DIGI) during treadmill walking, utilizing manually counted steps as the criterion. Study 2 compared free-living step count data from 35 participants (17 males, 18 females) wearing the SWA and DIGI (comparison) for 3 consecutive days. RESULTS: During Study 1, the SWA underestimated steps by 16.0%, 10.7%, 5.6%, 6.1%, and 6.5% at speeds of 54 m/min, 67 m/min, 80 m/min, 94 m/min, and 107 m/min, respectively, compared to manually counted steps. During Study 2, the intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient of mean steps/d between the SWA and DIGI was strong (r = 0.98, p < 0.001). Unlike Study 1, the SWA overestimated step counts during the 3-day wear period by an average of 1028 steps/d (or +11.3%) compared to the DIGI. When analyzed individually, the SWA consistently overestimated step counts for each day (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The SWA underestimates steps during treadmill walking and appears to overestimate steps during free-living compared to the DIGI pedometer. Caution is warranted when using the SWA to count steps. Modifications are needed to enhance step counting accuracy.
Authors: Tiffany Jane Dwyer; Jennifer Ailsey Alison; Zoe Jane McKeough; Mark Russell Elkins; Peter Thomas Patrick Bye Journal: Respir Med Date: 2009-05-23 Impact factor: 3.415
Authors: Barbara J Nicklas; Karen E Dennis; Dora M Berman; John Sorkin; Alice S Ryan; Andrew P Goldberg Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Tracie C Collins; Scott Lunos; Teri Carlson; Kimberly Henderson; Marissa Lightbourne; Brittney Nelson; James S Hodges Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Carmen D Tekwe; Roger S Zoh; Miao Yang; Raymond J Carroll; Gilson Honvoh; David B Allison; Mark Benden; Lan Xue Journal: Stat Med Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 2.373
Authors: Helen Sheahan; Kimberley Canning; Nishka Refausse; Ewan M Kinnear; Greg Jorgensen; James R Walsh; Peter A Lazzarini Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: James Weatherall; Yurek Paprocki; Theresa M Meyer; Ian Kudel; Edward A Witt Journal: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Date: 2018-06-05 Impact factor: 4.773
Authors: Francesco Negrini; Giulio Gasperini; Eleonora Guanziroli; Jacopo Antonino Vitale; Giuseppe Banfi; Franco Molteni Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-05-02 Impact factor: 3.390