Publication: The validity and accuracy of wrist-worn activity monitors in lower-limb prosthesis users
dc.contributor.author | John D. Smith | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Gary Guerra | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Brian G. Burkholder | en_US |
dc.contributor.other | Texas A&M University | en_US |
dc.contributor.other | Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-01-27T10:31:01Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-01-27T10:31:01Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-01-01 | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | © 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Purpose: To investigate the accuracy of consumer-grade wrist-worn activity monitors during over ground walking in persons using lower-limb prosthetics. Method: Thirty-two participants using lower-limb prosthetics (age = 49.7 ± 14.0 yrs, height = 176.1 ± 11.6 cm, weight = 87.8 ± 21.1 kg) were fitted with a Polar Loop, Fitbit Flex, MOVEBAND, Garmin Vivofit, and a Fitbit Charge on the right and left wrists as well as an Omron HJ-113 pedometer on the right and left hip, then walked 140 m at a self-selected pace on an indoor flat surface. Results: There were no significant differences between any of the respective right and left monitors, p > 0.05. When comparing step counts with actual step counts, Polar Loop (p = 0.001), Fitbit Flex (p = 0.001), and MOVEBAND (p = 0.001) were significantly lower than actual step counts. No significant differences existed between the remaining monitors and actual step counts (p > 0.05). Omron incurred the least error (0.6%), followed by Garmin Vivofit (1.3%) and Fitbit Charge (3.6%), with greatest error in the MOVEBAND (21.4%) and Polar Loop (13.1%). Bland–Altman plots suggest Garmin Vivofit to have the least error along with tightest agreement among the wrist-worn activity monitors Conclusion: When considering the use of consumer-grade wrist-worn activity monitors for assessing step counts in persons using lower-limb prostheses, the Garmin Vivofit seems to be the best option followed by Fitbit Charge.Implications for rehabilitation This study shows that despite potential of altered gait, some consumer-grade activity monitors can track over ground walking quite well. Clinicians and researchers can use these devices to track activity and prosthetic compliance in their patients. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Disability and Rehabilitation. (2019) | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/09638288.2019.1587792 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 14645165 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 09638288 | en_US |
dc.identifier.other | 2-s2.0-85064545174 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/52267 | |
dc.rights | Mahidol University | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | SCOPUS | en_US |
dc.source.uri | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85064545174&origin=inward | en_US |
dc.subject | Medicine | en_US |
dc.title | The validity and accuracy of wrist-worn activity monitors in lower-limb prosthesis users | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
mu.datasource.scopus | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85064545174&origin=inward | en_US |