Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Published: 2019-10-29

Physical activity monitoring devices: energy expenditure comparison in a setting of free-living activities

Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Laboratory of Adapted Motor Activity (LAMA), Department of Public Health, Experimental Medicine and Forensic Science, University of Pavia, via Forlanini 2, 27100, Pavia, Italy
Energy Expenditure Physical Activity Devices Accuracy Wearables
Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of Energy Expenditure (EE) estimation provided by 3 wearable devices [Fitbit-One (FO), Sensewear Armband (AR) and Actiheart (AC)] in a setting of free-living activities. 43 participants (24 females; 23.4±.4,5yrs) performed 9 activities: sedentary (watching video, reading), walking (on treadmill and outdoor), running (on treadmill and outdoor) and moderate-to-vigorous activities (Wii gaming, taking the stairs and playing football). Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) and Pearson’s correlation were calculated to assess the validity of each instrument in comparison to a portable metabolic analyser (PMA). In overall comparison MAPE’s were 7,7% for AR (r=.86; p<.0001), 8,6% for FO (r=.69; P<.001), and 11.6% for AC (r=.81; p<.0001). These findings support the accuracy of the wearables. The AR was the most accurate in the whole protocol. However, MAPE results suggest that devices algorithms should be improved for better measure of EE during moderate-to-vigorous activities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite

Vandoni, M., Carnevale Pellino, V., Dell’Anna, S., Ricagno, E., Liberali, G., Bonfanti, C., & Correale, L. (2019). Physical activity monitoring devices: energy expenditure comparison in a setting of free-living activities. International Journal of Physical Education, Fitness and Sports, 8(4), 45-54. Retrieved from https://www.ijpefs.com/ijpefs/article/view/258


Abstract Views 311