IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0039198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity of Six Activity Monitors in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Comparison with Indirect Calorimetry

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Van Remoortel
  • Yogini Raste
  • Zafeiris Louvaris
  • Santiago Giavedoni
  • Chris Burtin
  • Daniel Langer
  • Frederick Wilson
  • Roberto Rabinovich
  • Ioannis Vogiatzis
  • Nicholas S Hopkinson
  • Thierry Troosters
  • on behalf of PROactive consortium

Abstract

Reduced physical activity is an important feature of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Various activity monitors are available but their validity is poorly established. The aim was to evaluate the validity of six monitors in patients with COPD. We hypothesized triaxial monitors to be more valid compared to uniaxial monitors. Thirty-nine patients (age 68±7years, FEV1 54±18%predicted) performed a one-hour standardized activity protocol. Patients wore 6 monitors (Kenz Lifecorder (Kenz), Actiwatch, RT3, Actigraph GT3X (Actigraph), Dynaport MiniMod (MiniMod), and SenseWear Armband (SenseWear)) as well as a portable metabolic system (Oxycon Mobile). Validity was evaluated by correlation analysis between indirect calorimetry (VO2) and the monitor outputs: Metabolic Equivalent of Task [METs] (SenseWear, MiniMod), activity counts (Actiwatch), vector magnitude units (Actigraph, RT3) and arbitrary units (Kenz) over the whole protocol and slow versus fast walking. Minute-by-minute correlations were highest for the MiniMod (r = 0.82), Actigraph (r = 0.79), SenseWear (r = 0.73) and RT3 (r = 0.73). Over the whole protocol, the mean correlations were best for the SenseWear (r = 0.76), Kenz (r = 0.52), Actigraph (r = 0.49) and MiniMod (r = 0.45). The MiniMod (r = 0.94) and Actigraph (r = 0.88) performed better in detecting different walking speeds. The Dynaport MiniMod, Actigraph GT3X and SenseWear Armband (all triaxial monitors) are the most valid monitors during standardized physical activities. The Dynaport MiniMod and Actigraph GT3X discriminate best between different walking speeds.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Van Remoortel & Yogini Raste & Zafeiris Louvaris & Santiago Giavedoni & Chris Burtin & Daniel Langer & Frederick Wilson & Roberto Rabinovich & Ioannis Vogiatzis & Nicholas S Hopkinson & Thierry T, 2012. "Validity of Six Activity Monitors in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Comparison with Indirect Calorimetry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-11, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0039198
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0039198
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0039198&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0039198?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0039198. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.