比较腕戴 Fitbit Charge 2 和腰戴 Actigraph GTX3 在测量职业环境中步数的效果。

Comparison of the Wrist-Worn Fitbit Charge 2 and the Waist-Worn Actigraph GTX3 for Measuring Steps Taken in Occupational Settings.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, UConn Health, 263 Farmington Ave., Farmington, CT 06032, USA.

出版信息

Ann Work Expo Health. 2022 Feb 18;66(2):281-284. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxab065.

DOI:10.1093/annweh/wxab065

PMID:34383020

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

If consumer-based monitors such as Fitbit can measure activity accurately, it could provide opportunities for improved assessment of physical activity in general and at work for research purposes. The accuracy of the Fitbit has hardly been investigated in an occupational setting.

METHODS

We compared measurements of steps taken at work, out-of-work, and in total of a wrist-worn Fitbit to a waist-worn Actigraph. Seventeen participants wore the Fitbit and Actigraph for 1 full workday.

RESULTS

Compared with the Actigraph, the Fitbit consistently recorded more steps [mean steps at work Fitbit = 7850 (6974), Actigraph = 4396 (1991); out-of-work Fitbit = 6414 (5691), Actigraph = 4116 (3502); total Fitbit = 13 478 (10 666), Actigraph = 8009 (5167)].

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the Actigraph, the Fitbit consistently recorded more steps at work, out-of-work, and in total. The Fitbit and Actigraph recordings were more consistent for measuring steps taken out-of-work compared with at work. Steps counts recorded by the Fitbit, especially in occupational settings, may be inaccurate.

摘要

目的

如果基于消费者的监测器（如 Fitbit）能够准确测量活动量，那么这将为研究目的提供改进对一般活动和工作场所活动评估的机会。Fitbit 的准确性在职业环境中几乎没有被研究过。

方法

我们比较了佩戴在手腕上的 Fitbit 与佩戴在腰部的 Actigraph 在工作时、工作外和总计的步数测量值。17 名参与者佩戴 Fitbit 和 Actigraph 进行了一整天的工作。

结果

与 Actigraph 相比，Fitbit 始终记录了更多的步数[工作时 Fitbit 的平均步数=7850（6974），Actigraph = 4396（1991）；工作外 Fitbit = 6414（5691），Actigraph = 4116（3502）；总步数 Fitbit = 13478（10666），Actigraph = 8009（5167）]。