A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Accuracy of 2 activity monitors in detecting steps in people with stroke and traumatic brain injury. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: Advances in sensor technologies and signal processing techniques provide a method to accurately measure walking activity in the home and community. Activity monitors geared toward consumer or patient use may be an alternative to more expensive monitors designed for research to measure stepping activity.

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the accuracy of 2 consumer/patient activity monitors, the Fitbit Ultra and the Nike+ Fuelband, in identifying stepping activity in people with stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Secondarily, the study sought to compare the accuracy of these 2 activity monitors with that of the StepWatch Activity Monitor (SAM) and a pedometer, the Yamax Digi-Walker SW-701 pedometer (YDWP).

Design: A cross-sectional design was used for this study.

Method: People with chronic stroke and TBI wore the 4 activity monitors while they performed the Two-Minute Walk Test (2MWT), during which they were videotaped. Activity monitor estimated steps taken were compared with actual steps taken counted from videotape. Accuracy and agreement between activity monitor estimated steps and actual steps were examined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [2,1]) and the Bland-Altman method.

Results: The SAM demonstrated the greatest accuracy (ICC [2,1]=.97, mean difference between actual steps and SAM estimated steps=4.7 steps) followed by the Fitbit Ultra (ICC [2,1]=.73, mean difference between actual steps and Fitbit Ultra estimated steps=-9.7 steps), the YDWP (ICC [2,1]=.42, mean difference between actual steps and YDWP estimated steps=-28.8 steps), and the Nike+ Fuelband (ICC [2,1]=.20, mean difference between actual steps and Nike+ Fuelband estimated steps=-66.2 steps).

Limitations: Walking activity was measured over a short distance in a closed environment, and participants were high functioning ambulators, with a mean gait speed of 0.93 m/s.

Conclusions: The Fitbit Ultra may be a low-cost alternative to measure the stepping activity in level, predictable environments of people with stroke and TBI who can walk at speeds ≥0.58 m/s.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20120525DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

actual steps
24
activity monitors
20
fitbit ultra
16
difference actual
16
steps
12
people stroke
12
nike+ fuelband
12
activity monitor
12
activity
11
accuracy activity
8

Similar Publications