Validation of Consumer-Based Hip and Wrist Activity Monitors in Older Adults With Varied Ambulatory Abilities

Theresa A. Floegel, Alberto Florez-Pregonero, Eric B. Hekler, Matthew Buman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

RESULTS: Nonimpaired adults steps were underestimated by 4.4% for StepWatch (ICC = 0.87), 2.6% for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.80), 4.5% for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.72), 26.9% for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.15), and 2.9% for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.55). Impaired adults steps were underestimated by 3.5% for StepWatch (ICC = 0.91), 1.7% for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.96), 3.2% for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.89), 16.3% for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.25), and 8.4% for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.50). Cane-user and walker-user steps were underestimated by StepWatch by 1.8% (ICC = 0.98) and 1.3% (ICC = 0.99), respectively, where all other monitors underestimated steps by >11.5% (ICCs < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: StepWatch, Omron HJ-112, Fitbit One, and Jawbone UP appeared accurate at measuring steps in older adults with nonimpaired and impaired ambulation during a self-paced walking test. StepWatch also appeared accurate at measuring steps in cane-users.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of step detection in consumer-based wearable activity monitors in older adults with varied ambulatory abilities is not known.

METHODS: We assessed the validity of two hip-worn (Fitbit One and Omron HJ-112) and two wrist-worn (Fitbit Flex and Jawbone UP) activity monitors in 99 older adults of varying ambulatory abilities and also included the validity results from the ankle-worn StepWatch as a comparison device. Nonimpaired, impaired (Short Physical Performance Battery Score < 9), cane-using, or walker-using older adults (62 and older) ambulated at a self-selected pace for 100 m wearing all activity monitors simultaneously. The criterion measure was directly observed steps. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), mean percent error and mean absolute percent error, equivalency, and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess accuracy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)229-236
Number of pages8
JournalThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences
Volume72
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2017

Fingerprint

Canes
Wrist
Walkers
Hip
Walking
Reproducibility of Results
Ankle
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Accelerometer
  • Accuracy
  • Exercise
  • Pedometer
  • Physical activity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aging
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology

Cite this

Validation of Consumer-Based Hip and Wrist Activity Monitors in Older Adults With Varied Ambulatory Abilities. / Floegel, Theresa A.; Florez-Pregonero, Alberto; Hekler, Eric B.; Buman, Matthew.

In: The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, Vol. 72, No. 2, 01.02.2017, p. 229-236.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{757324f3fee245a293d148d7e9dc9162,
title = "Validation of Consumer-Based Hip and Wrist Activity Monitors in Older Adults With Varied Ambulatory Abilities",
abstract = "RESULTS: Nonimpaired adults steps were underestimated by 4.4{\%} for StepWatch (ICC = 0.87), 2.6{\%} for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.80), 4.5{\%} for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.72), 26.9{\%} for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.15), and 2.9{\%} for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.55). Impaired adults steps were underestimated by 3.5{\%} for StepWatch (ICC = 0.91), 1.7{\%} for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.96), 3.2{\%} for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.89), 16.3{\%} for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.25), and 8.4{\%} for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.50). Cane-user and walker-user steps were underestimated by StepWatch by 1.8{\%} (ICC = 0.98) and 1.3{\%} (ICC = 0.99), respectively, where all other monitors underestimated steps by >11.5{\%} (ICCs < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: StepWatch, Omron HJ-112, Fitbit One, and Jawbone UP appeared accurate at measuring steps in older adults with nonimpaired and impaired ambulation during a self-paced walking test. StepWatch also appeared accurate at measuring steps in cane-users.BACKGROUND: The accuracy of step detection in consumer-based wearable activity monitors in older adults with varied ambulatory abilities is not known.METHODS: We assessed the validity of two hip-worn (Fitbit One and Omron HJ-112) and two wrist-worn (Fitbit Flex and Jawbone UP) activity monitors in 99 older adults of varying ambulatory abilities and also included the validity results from the ankle-worn StepWatch as a comparison device. Nonimpaired, impaired (Short Physical Performance Battery Score < 9), cane-using, or walker-using older adults (62 and older) ambulated at a self-selected pace for 100 m wearing all activity monitors simultaneously. The criterion measure was directly observed steps. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), mean percent error and mean absolute percent error, equivalency, and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess accuracy.",
keywords = "Accelerometer, Accuracy, Exercise, Pedometer, Physical activity",
author = "Floegel, {Theresa A.} and Alberto Florez-Pregonero and Hekler, {Eric B.} and Matthew Buman",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/gerona/glw098",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "72",
pages = "229--236",
journal = "Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences",
issn = "1079-5006",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of Consumer-Based Hip and Wrist Activity Monitors in Older Adults With Varied Ambulatory Abilities

AU - Floegel, Theresa A.

AU - Florez-Pregonero, Alberto

AU - Hekler, Eric B.

AU - Buman, Matthew

PY - 2017/2/1

Y1 - 2017/2/1

N2 - RESULTS: Nonimpaired adults steps were underestimated by 4.4% for StepWatch (ICC = 0.87), 2.6% for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.80), 4.5% for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.72), 26.9% for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.15), and 2.9% for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.55). Impaired adults steps were underestimated by 3.5% for StepWatch (ICC = 0.91), 1.7% for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.96), 3.2% for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.89), 16.3% for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.25), and 8.4% for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.50). Cane-user and walker-user steps were underestimated by StepWatch by 1.8% (ICC = 0.98) and 1.3% (ICC = 0.99), respectively, where all other monitors underestimated steps by >11.5% (ICCs < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: StepWatch, Omron HJ-112, Fitbit One, and Jawbone UP appeared accurate at measuring steps in older adults with nonimpaired and impaired ambulation during a self-paced walking test. StepWatch also appeared accurate at measuring steps in cane-users.BACKGROUND: The accuracy of step detection in consumer-based wearable activity monitors in older adults with varied ambulatory abilities is not known.METHODS: We assessed the validity of two hip-worn (Fitbit One and Omron HJ-112) and two wrist-worn (Fitbit Flex and Jawbone UP) activity monitors in 99 older adults of varying ambulatory abilities and also included the validity results from the ankle-worn StepWatch as a comparison device. Nonimpaired, impaired (Short Physical Performance Battery Score < 9), cane-using, or walker-using older adults (62 and older) ambulated at a self-selected pace for 100 m wearing all activity monitors simultaneously. The criterion measure was directly observed steps. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), mean percent error and mean absolute percent error, equivalency, and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess accuracy.

AB - RESULTS: Nonimpaired adults steps were underestimated by 4.4% for StepWatch (ICC = 0.87), 2.6% for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.80), 4.5% for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.72), 26.9% for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.15), and 2.9% for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.55). Impaired adults steps were underestimated by 3.5% for StepWatch (ICC = 0.91), 1.7% for Fitbit One (ICC = 0.96), 3.2% for Omron HJ-112 (ICC = 0.89), 16.3% for Fitbit Flex (ICC = 0.25), and 8.4% for Jawbone UP (ICC = 0.50). Cane-user and walker-user steps were underestimated by StepWatch by 1.8% (ICC = 0.98) and 1.3% (ICC = 0.99), respectively, where all other monitors underestimated steps by >11.5% (ICCs < 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: StepWatch, Omron HJ-112, Fitbit One, and Jawbone UP appeared accurate at measuring steps in older adults with nonimpaired and impaired ambulation during a self-paced walking test. StepWatch also appeared accurate at measuring steps in cane-users.BACKGROUND: The accuracy of step detection in consumer-based wearable activity monitors in older adults with varied ambulatory abilities is not known.METHODS: We assessed the validity of two hip-worn (Fitbit One and Omron HJ-112) and two wrist-worn (Fitbit Flex and Jawbone UP) activity monitors in 99 older adults of varying ambulatory abilities and also included the validity results from the ankle-worn StepWatch as a comparison device. Nonimpaired, impaired (Short Physical Performance Battery Score < 9), cane-using, or walker-using older adults (62 and older) ambulated at a self-selected pace for 100 m wearing all activity monitors simultaneously. The criterion measure was directly observed steps. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), mean percent error and mean absolute percent error, equivalency, and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess accuracy.

KW - Accelerometer

KW - Accuracy

KW - Exercise

KW - Pedometer

KW - Physical activity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020425922&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85020425922&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/gerona/glw098

DO - 10.1093/gerona/glw098

M3 - Article

C2 - 27257217

AN - SCOPUS:85020425922

VL - 72

SP - 229

EP - 236

JO - Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences

JF - Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences

SN - 1079-5006

IS - 2

ER -