A comprehensive evaluation of motion sensor step-counting error
Publication: Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism
12 January 2011
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the effect that walking speed, gender, leg length, motion sensor tilt angle, brand, and placement have on motion sensor step-counting error. Fifty-nine participants performed treadmill walking trials at 6 speeds while wearing 5 motion sensor brands placed on the anterior (Digiwalker, DW; Walk4Life, WFL; New Lifestyles, NL; Omron, OM), midaxillary (DW; WFL; NL; ActiGraph, AG), and posterior (DW, WFL, NL) aspects of the waistline. The anterior-placed NL and midaxillary-placed AG were the most accurate motion sensors. Motion sensor step-count error tended to decrease at faster walking speeds, with lesser tilt angles, and with an anterior waistline placement. Gender and leg length had no effect on motion sensor step-count error. We conclude that the NL and AG yielded the most accurate step counts at a range of walking speeds in individuals with different physical characteristics.
Résumé
Cette étude se propose de faire l’évaluation complète des effets de la vitesse de marche, du sexe, de la longueur des jambes, de l’angle d’inclinaison du détecteur de mouvement ainsi que de la marque et sa position sur l’erreur de mesure du nombre de pas enregistré par le détecteur de mouvement. Cinquante-neuf sujets participent à des séances de marche sur un tapis roulant à 6 vitesses tout en portant des détecteurs de mouvements de cinq marques et placés à la partie antérieure (Digiwalker, DW; Walk4Life, WFL; New Lifestyles, NL; Omron, OM), dans le plan axillaire (DW; WFL; NL; ActiGraph, AG) et à la partie postérieure de la taille (DW, WFL, NL). Le détecteur NL placé à la partie antérieure et le détecteur AG installé dans le plan axillaire donnent les mesures les plus précises. L’erreur de mesure du nombre de pas compté par le détecteur tend à diminuer avec l’augmentation de la vitesse de marche, la diminution de l’angle d’inclinaison et le positionnement à la partie antérieure de la taille. Le sexe et la longueur des jambes n’influent pas sur l’erreur de mesure du nombre de pas enregistré par le détecteur de mouvement. En conclusion, les détecteurs de marque NL et AG donnent les mesures les plus précises du nombre de pas, et ce, à diverses vitesses de marche et chez des sujets aux caractéristiques physiques différentes.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Abel, M.G. 2008. The effect of pedometer tilt angle on pedometer accuracy. Int. J. Fit. 4(1): 51–57.
Abel, M.G., Hannon, J.C., Sell, K., Lillie, T., Conlin, G., and Anderson, D. 2008. Validation of the Kenz Lifecorder EX and ActiGraph GT1M accelerometers for walking and running in adults. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 33(6): 1155–1164.
Abel, M.G., Hannon, J.C., Eisenman, P.A., Ransdell, L.B., Pett, M., and Williams, D.P. 2009. Waist circumference, pedometer placement, and step-counting accuracy in youth. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport, 80(3): 434–444.
ACSM. 2006. Health-related physical fitness testing and interpretation. In ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. Edited by M. Whaley. American College of Sports Medicine, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, Pa. p. 60.
Bassey, E.J., Dallosso, H.M., Fentem, P.H., Irving, J.M., and Patrick, J.M. 1987. Validation of a simple mechanical accelerometer (pedometer) for the estimation of walking activity. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 56(3): 323–330.
CDC. 2005. Anthropometric reference data for children and adults. U.S. population, 1999–2002. In Advance data from vital and health statistics. Edited by M.A. McDowell, C.D. Fryar, R. Hirsch, and C.L. Ogden. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Number 361. pp. 12–30.
Crouter, S.E., Schneider, P.L., Karabulut, M., and Bassett, D.R., Jr. 2003. Validity of 10 electronic pedometers for measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 35(8): 1455–1460.
Crouter, S.E., Schneider, P.L., and Bassett, D.R., Jr. 2005. Spring-levered versus piezo-electric pedometer accuracy in overweight and obese adults. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 37(10): 1673–1679.
Graser, S.V., Pangrazi, R.P., and Vincent, W.J. 2007. Effects of placement, attachment, and weight classification on pedometer accuracy. J. Phys. Act. Health, 4(4): 359–369.
Hatano, Y. 1997. Prevalence and use of pedometer. Research J. Walking, 1: 45–54.
Jago, R., Watson, K., Baranowski, T., Zakeri, I., Yoo, S., Baranowski, J., and Conry, K. 2006. Pedometer reliability, validity and daily activity targets among 10- to 15-year-old boys. J. Sports Sci. 24(3): 241–251.
Le Masurier, G.C., Lee, S.M., and Tudor-Locke, C. 2004. Motion sensor accuracy under controlled and free-living conditions. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 36(5): 905–910.
Swartz, A.M., Bassett, D.R., Jr., Moore, J.B., Thompson, D.L., and Strath, S.J. 2003. Effects of body mass index on the accuracy of an electronic pedometer. Int. J. Sports Med. 24(8): 588–592.
Zatsiorky, V.M., Werner, S.L., and Kaimin, M.A. 1994. Basic kinematics of walking. Step length and step frequency. A review. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fitness, 34(2): 109–134.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism
Volume 36 • Number 1 • January 2011
Pages: 166 - 170
History
Received: 23 April 2010
Accepted: 8 October 2010
Version of record online: 12 January 2011
Key Words
Mots-clés
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Other Metrics
Citations
Cite As
Mark G.AbelM.G. Abel, NicolePeritoreN. Peritore, RobertShapiroR. Shapiro, David R.MullineauxD.R. Mullineaux, KellyRodriguezK. Rodriguez, and James C.HannonJ.C. Hannon. 2011. A comprehensive evaluation of motion sensor step-counting error. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 36(1): 166-170. https://doi.org/10.1139/H10-095