Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Validity of physical activity monitors in adults participating in free living activities
  1. Sveinung Berntsen (sveinung.berntsen{at}nih.no)
  1. Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norway
    1. Rune Hageberg (rune.hageberg{at}nih.no)
    1. Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norway
      1. Anders Aandstad (anders.aandstad{at}nih.no)
      1. Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norway
        1. Petter Mowinckel (petter.mowinckel{at}ulleval.no)
        1. Ullevaal University Hospital, Norway
          1. Sigmund A Anderssen (sigmund.anderssen{at}nih.no)
          1. Norwegian School of Sports Sciences, Norway
            1. Kai-Hakon Håkon Carlsen (k.h.carlsen{at}medisin.uio.no)
            1. University of Oslo, Norway
              1. Lars Bo Andersen (lars.bo.andersen{at}nih.no)
              1. Norwegian University of Sport and PE, Norway

                Abstract

                Background: For a given subject, time in moderate to very vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA) varies substantially among physical activity monitors.

                Objective: The primary objective of the present study was to determine whether time in MVPA recorded with SenseWear™ Pro2 Armband (Armband), ActiGraph, ikcal and ActiReg® is different compared to indirect calorimetry. The secondary objective was to determine whether these activity monitors estimate energy expenditure different compared to indirect calorimetry.

                Material and methods: Fourteen men and six women wore the activity monitors and a portable oxygen analyzer for 120 minutes doing a variety of activities of different intensities. Resting metabolic rate (RMR) was measured with indirect calorimetry. The cut off points defining moderate, vigorous and very vigorous intensity were 3, 6 and 9 times RMR.

                Results: Armband and ActiGraph overestimated time in MVPA by 2.9 and 2.5% and ikcal and ActiReg® underestimated time in MVPA by 11.6 and 98.7%, respectively. ActiReg® (p=0.004) and ActiGraph (p=0.007) underestimated energy expenditure in MVPA and all monitors underestimated total energy expenditure (by 5 to 21%). Conclusions: Recorded time in MVPA and energy expenditure varies substantially among physical activity monitors. Thus, when comparing physical activity level among studies, it is essential to know the type of physical activity monitor being used.

                Statistics from Altmetric.com

                Request permissions

                If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.