Gaz Daniel V, Rieck Thomas M, Peterson Nolan W, Ferguson Jennifer A, Schroeder Darrell R, Dunfee Heather A, Henderzahs-Mason Jill M, Hagen Philip T
1 Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic Healthy Living Program, Rochester, MN, USA.
2 Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic Healthy Living Program, Rochester, MN, USA.
Am J Health Promot. 2018 Nov;32(8):1671-1678. doi: 10.1177/0890117118763273. Epub 2018 Mar 20.
Clinicians and fitness professionals are increasingly recommending the use of activity trackers. This study compares commercially available activity tracking devices for step and distance accuracy in common exercise settings.
Cross sectional.
Rochester, Minnesota.
Thirty-two men (n = 10) and women (n = 22) participated in the study.
Researchers manually counted steps and measured distance for all trials, while participants wore 6 activity tracking devices that measured steps and distance.
We computed the difference between the number of steps measured by the device and the actual number of steps recorded by the observers, as well as the distance displayed by the device and the actual distance measured.
The analyses showed that both the device and walking trials affected the accuracy of the results (steps or distance, P < .001). Hip-based devices were more accurate and consistent for measuring step count. No significant differences were found among devices or locations for the distance measured.
Hip-based activity tracking devices varied in accuracy but performed better than their wrist-based counterparts for step accuracy. Distance measurements for both types of devices were more consistent but lacked accuracy.
临床医生和健身专业人士越来越多地推荐使用活动追踪器。本研究比较了在常见运动环境中,市售活动追踪设备在步数和距离测量方面的准确性。
横断面研究。
明尼苏达州罗切斯特市。
32名男性(n = 10)和女性(n = 22)参与了该研究。
在所有试验中,研究人员手动计数步数并测量距离,同时参与者佩戴6种测量步数和距离的活动追踪设备。
我们计算了设备测量的步数与观察者记录的实际步数之间的差异,以及设备显示的距离与实际测量距离之间的差异。
分析表明,设备和步行试验均影响结果的准确性(步数或距离,P <.001)。基于臀部的设备在测量步数方面更准确且更一致。在测量的距离方面,各设备或位置之间未发现显著差异。
基于臀部的活动追踪设备在准确性上存在差异,但在步数准确性方面比基于手腕的设备表现更好。两种类型设备的距离测量更一致,但缺乏准确性。