For total EE , correlation coefficients were statistically significantly lower in uniaxial compared to multisensor devices .
For active EE , correlations were slightly but not significantly lower in uniaxial compared to triaxial and multisensor devices .
The high level of heterogeneity in the validation studies is only partly explained by the type of activity monitor and the activity monitor outcome .
Triaxial and multisensor devices tend to be more valid monitors .
The assessment of physical activity in healthy population s and in those with chronic diseases is challenging .
The aim of this systematic review was to identify whether available activity monitors ( AM ) have been appropriately vali date d for use in assessing physical activity in these groups .
Accuracy of a novel multi-sensor board for measuring physical activity and energy expenditure
The ability to relate physical activity to health depends on accurate measurement . Yet , none of the available methods are fully satisfactory due to several factors . This study examined the accuracy of a multi-sensor board ( MSB ) that infers activity types ( sitting , st and ing , walking , stair climbing , and running ) and estimates energy expenditure in 57 adults ( 32 females ) 39.2 ± 13.5 years . In the laboratory , subjects walked and ran on a treadmill over a select range of speeds and grade s for 3 min each ( six stages in r and om order ) while connected to a stationary calorimeter , preceded and followed by brief sitting and st and ing . On a different day , subjects completed scripted activities in the field connected to a portable calorimeter . The MSB was attached to a strap at the right hip . Subjects repeated one condition ( r and omly selected ) on the third day . Accuracy of inferred activities compared with recorded activities ( correctly identified activities/total activities × 100 ) was 97 and 84 % in the laboratory and field , respectively . Absolute accuracy of energy expenditure [ 100 – absolute value ( kilocalories MSB – kilocalories calorimeter/kilocalories calorimeter ) × 100 ] was 89 and 76 % in the laboratory and field , the later being different ( P < 0.05 ) from the calorimeter . Test – retest reliability for energy expenditure was significant in both setting s ( P < 0.0001 ; r = 0.97 ) . In general , the MSB provides accurate measures of activity type in laboratory and field setting s and energy expenditure during treadmill walking and running although the device underestimates energy expenditure in the field
For total EE , correlation coefficients were statistically significantly lower in uniaxial compared to multisensor devices .
For active EE , correlations were slightly but not significantly lower in uniaxial compared to triaxial and multisensor devices .
The high level of heterogeneity in the validation studies is only partly explained by the type of activity monitor and the activity monitor outcome .
Triaxial and multisensor devices tend to be more valid monitors .
The assessment of physical activity in healthy population s and in those with chronic diseases is challenging .
The aim of this systematic review was to identify whether available activity monitors ( AM ) have been appropriately vali date d for use in assessing physical activity in these groups .