Optoelectronics and Measurement Techniques Research Group, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Biology of Physical Activity, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
PLoS One. 2019 Jul 10;14(7):e0219563. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219563. eCollection 2019.
Wrist-mounted motion sensors can quantify the volume and intensity of physical activities, but little is known about their long-term validity. Our aim was to validate a wrist motion sensor in estimating daily energy expenditure, including any change induced by long-term participation in endurance and strength training. Supplemental heart rate monitoring during weekly exercise was also investigated.
A 13-day doubly labeled water (DLW) measurement of total energy expenditure (TEE) was performed twice in healthy male subjects: during two last weeks of a 12-week Control period (n = 15) and during two last weeks of a 12-week combined strength and aerobic Training period (n = 13). Resting energy expenditure was estimated using two equations: one with body weight and age, and another one with fat-free mass. TEE and activity induced energy expenditure (AEE) were determined from motion sensor alone, and from motions sensor combined with heart rate monitor, the latter being worn during exercise only.
When body weight and age were used in the calculation of resting energy expenditure, the motion sensor data alone explained 78% and 62% of the variation in TEE assessed by DLW at the end of Control and Training periods, respectively, with a bias of +1.75 (p <.001) and +1.19 MJ/day (p = .002). When exercise heart rate data was added to the model, the combined wearable device approach explained 85% and 70% of the variation in TEE assessed by DLW with a bias of +1.89 and +1.75 MJ/day (p <.001 for both). While significant increases in TEE and AEE were detected by all methods as a result of participation in regular training, motion sensor approach underestimated the change measured by DLW: +1.13±0.66 by DLW, +0.59±0.69 (p = .004) by motion sensor, and +0.98±0.70 MJ/day by combination of motion sensor and heart rate. Use of fat-free mass in the estimation of resting energy expenditure removed the biases between the wearable device estimations and the golden standard reference method of TEE and demonstrated a training-induced increase in resting energy expenditure by +0.18±0.13 MJ/day (p <.001).
Wrist motion sensor combined with a heart rate monitor during exercise sessions, showed high agreement with the golden standard measurement of daily TEE and its change induced by participation in a long-term training protocol. The positive findings concerning the validity, especially the ability to follow-up the change associated with a lifestyle modification, can be considered significant because they partially determine the feasibility of wearable devices as quantifiers of health-related behavior.
腕部运动传感器可量化身体活动的体积和强度,但对其长期有效性知之甚少。我们的目的是验证腕部运动传感器在估计日常能量消耗方面的有效性,包括长期参加耐力和力量训练所引起的任何变化。还研究了每周运动时补充心率监测。
在健康男性受试者中进行了为期 13 天的双标记水(DLW)测量总能量消耗(TEE):在 12 周对照期的最后两周(n = 15)和在 12 周结合力量和有氧运动训练期的最后两周(n = 13)。使用两种方程估算静息能量消耗:一种使用体重和年龄,另一种使用去脂体重。仅使用运动传感器确定静息能量消耗和活动引起的能量消耗(AEE),并使用运动传感器和心率监测器组合确定,后者仅在运动期间佩戴。
当在静息能量消耗的计算中使用体重和年龄时,运动传感器数据单独解释了在对照期和训练期结束时通过 DLW 评估的 TEE 的 78%和 62%的变化,偏差分别为+1.75(p <.001)和+1.19 MJ/天(p =.002)。当将运动时的心率数据添加到模型中时,组合的可穿戴设备方法分别解释了 DLW 评估的 TEE 的 85%和 70%的变化,偏差为+1.89 和+1.75 MJ/天(p <.001)。尽管所有方法都检测到由于定期训练而导致的 TEE 和 AEE 的显着增加,但运动传感器方法低估了通过 DLW 测量的变化:+1.13±0.66 通过 DLW,+0.59±0.69(p =.004)通过运动传感器,以及每天+0.98±0.70 MJ 的运动传感器和心率组合。使用去脂体重估算静息能量消耗可消除可穿戴设备估算值与 TEE 金标准参考方法之间的偏差,并显示出静息能量消耗随长期训练方案而增加,增加了+0.18±0.13 MJ/天(p <.001)。
腕部运动传感器与运动期间的心率监测器相结合,与每日 TEE 的金标准测量值及其因参加长期训练方案而引起的变化高度一致。关于有效性的积极发现,特别是与生活方式改变相关的变化的跟踪能力,具有重要意义,因为它们部分决定了可穿戴设备作为健康相关行为量化器的可行性。