Validation of a consumer-grade activity monitor for continuous daily activity monitoring in individuals with multiple sclerosis.
Physical activity
accelerometry
motor activity
multiple sclerosis
validation studies as topic (mesh heading)
Journal
Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical
ISSN: 2055-2173
Titre abrégé: Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101668877
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
01
05
2019
revised:
19
10
2019
accepted:
21
10
2019
entrez:
6
12
2019
pubmed:
6
12
2019
medline:
6
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Technological advancements of remote-monitoring used in clinical-care and research require validation of model updates. To compare the output of a newer consumer-grade accelerometer to a previous model in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and to the ActiGraph, a waist-worn device widely used in MS research. Thirty-one individuals with MS participated in a 7-day validation by the Fitbit Flex (Flex), Fitbit Flex-2 (Flex2) and ActiGraph GT3X. Primary outcome was step count. Valid epochs of 5-min block increments, where there was overlap of ≥1 step/min for both devices were compared and summed to give a Bland-Altman plots showed no systematic difference between the Flex and Flex2; mean step-count difference of 25 more steps-per-day more recorded by Flex2 (95% confidence intervals (CI) = 2, 48; Steps from Flex and Flex2 can be used interchangeably. Differences in total step count between ActiGraph and Flex devices can make cross-device comparisons of numerical step-counts challenging particularly for faster walkers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Technological advancements of remote-monitoring used in clinical-care and research require validation of model updates.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To compare the output of a newer consumer-grade accelerometer to a previous model in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and to the ActiGraph, a waist-worn device widely used in MS research.
METHODS
METHODS
Thirty-one individuals with MS participated in a 7-day validation by the Fitbit Flex (Flex), Fitbit Flex-2 (Flex2) and ActiGraph GT3X. Primary outcome was step count. Valid epochs of 5-min block increments, where there was overlap of ≥1 step/min for both devices were compared and summed to give a
RESULTS
RESULTS
Bland-Altman plots showed no systematic difference between the Flex and Flex2; mean step-count difference of 25 more steps-per-day more recorded by Flex2 (95% confidence intervals (CI) = 2, 48;
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Steps from Flex and Flex2 can be used interchangeably. Differences in total step count between ActiGraph and Flex devices can make cross-device comparisons of numerical step-counts challenging particularly for faster walkers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31803492
doi: 10.1177/2055217319888660
pii: 10.1177_2055217319888660
pmc: PMC6876176
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
2055217319888660Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2019.
Références
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 08;9(4):e93511
pubmed: 24714028
J Sports Sci. 2018 Jul;36(13):1502-1507
pubmed: 29099649
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Oct;90(10):1778-84
pubmed: 19801071
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Aug;94(8):1534-9
pubmed: 23419331
Lancet. 2008 Oct 25;372(9648):1502-17
pubmed: 18970977
Ann Neurol. 2011 Feb;69(2):292-302
pubmed: 21387374
Neurology. 1983 Nov;33(11):1444-52
pubmed: 6685237
Disabil Health J. 2016 Apr;9(2):320-3
pubmed: 26905972
Br J Anaesth. 2007 Sep;99(3):309-11
pubmed: 17702826
Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2011 May-Jun;53(6):397-403
pubmed: 21545925
Int J Hyperthermia. 2009 Feb;25(1):34-40
pubmed: 19219698
BMC Res Notes. 2014 Dec 23;7:952
pubmed: 25539733
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Mar 1;2(3):e190570
pubmed: 30874777
J Med Life. 2016 Jan-Mar;9(1):101-105
pubmed: 27974923
Adapt Phys Activ Q. 2007 Jul;24(3):245-53
pubmed: 17916920
J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(4):571-82
pubmed: 17613642
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
pubmed: 2868172
J Neurol. 2017 Feb;264(2):316-326
pubmed: 27896433
Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2016 Mar 4;2:2055217316634754
pubmed: 28607720
J Sci Med Sport. 2014 Sep;17(5):496-500
pubmed: 24268570
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004 Jun;75(6):884-8
pubmed: 15146006
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 28;11(4):e0154335
pubmed: 27124611
Int J Sports Med. 2013 Nov;34(11):975-82
pubmed: 23700330
Neurology. 2014 Jul 15;83(3):278-86
pubmed: 24871874
Med Eng Phys. 2012 Jun;34(5):590-7
pubmed: 21968005
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011 May;90(5):372-9
pubmed: 21389842
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016 Sep;23(14):1476-85
pubmed: 26907794
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011 Feb;43(2):357-64
pubmed: 20581716
Int J Cardiol. 2015 Apr 15;185:138-40
pubmed: 25795203
Eur Neurol. 2014;71(3-4):196-202
pubmed: 24457548
Expert Rev Neurother. 2012 Sep;12(9):1079-88
pubmed: 23039387
J Neurol Phys Ther. 2015 Apr;39(2):103-10
pubmed: 25742375
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Dec;94(12):2342-8
pubmed: 23906692
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 04;8(9):e73247
pubmed: 24023843