Hergenroeder Andrea L, Barone Gibbs Bethany, Kotlarczyk Mary P, Kowalsky Robert J, Perera Subashan, Brach Jennifer S
University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Texas A&M University-Kingsville, TX, USA.
Gerontol Geriatr Med. 2018 Jun 17;4:2333721418781126. doi: 10.1177/2333721418781126. eCollection 2018 Jan-Dec.
The aim of this study is to evaluate accuracy of research activity monitors in measuring steps in older adults with a range of walking abilities. Participants completed an initial assessment of gait speed. The accuracy of each monitor to record 100 steps was assessed across two walking trials. In all, 43 older adults (age 87 ± 5.7 years, 81.4% female) participated. Overall, the StepWatch had the highest accuracy (99.0% ± 1.5%), followed by the ActivPAL (93.7% ± 11.1%) and the Actigraph (51.4% ± 35.7%). The accuracy of the Actigraph and ActivPAL varied according to assistive device use, and the accuracy of all three monitors differed by gait speed category (all < .05). StepWatch was highly accurate (⩾97.7) across all conditions. The StepWatch and ActivPAL monitor were reasonably accurate in measuring steps in older adults who walk slowly and use an assistive device. The Actigraph significantly undercounted steps in those who walk slow or use an assistive device. Researchers should consider gait speed and the use of assistive devices when selecting an activity monitor.
本研究的目的是评估研究活动监测器在测量具有不同步行能力的老年人步数方面的准确性。参与者完成了步态速度的初步评估。在两次步行试验中评估了每个监测器记录100步的准确性。共有43名老年人(年龄87±5.7岁,81.4%为女性)参与。总体而言,StepWatch的准确性最高(99.0%±1.5%),其次是ActivPAL(93.7%±11.1%)和Actigraph(51.4%±35.7%)。Actigraph和ActivPAL的准确性因辅助设备的使用情况而异,并且所有三种监测器的准确性在不同步态速度类别中也有所不同(均P<0.05)。在所有情况下,StepWatch都具有很高的准确性(≥97.7)。StepWatch和ActivPAL监测器在测量步行缓慢且使用辅助设备的老年人步数方面相当准确。Actigraph在步行缓慢或使用辅助设备的人群中显著少计了步数。研究人员在选择活动监测器时应考虑步态速度和辅助设备的使用情况。