Accuracy and Precision of Actigraphy and SMARTwheels for Measuring Push Counts Across a Series of Wheelchair Propulsion Trials in Non-disabled Young Adults

Hunter Soleymani, Brenda Jeng, Beshoy Abdelmessih, R. Cowan, R. Motl
{"title":"Accuracy and Precision of Actigraphy and SMARTwheels for Measuring Push Counts Across a Series of Wheelchair Propulsion Trials in Non-disabled Young Adults","authors":"Hunter Soleymani, Brenda Jeng, Beshoy Abdelmessih, R. Cowan, R. Motl","doi":"10.5195/ijms.2023.1950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There has been a growing interest in “Lifestyle Physical Activity” (LPA) among wheelchair users. LPA can be quantified via “pushes” as an outcome metric. This study examined the accuracy and precision of research-grade devices for counting pushes across a series of wheelchair propulsion trials.\nMethods: Eleven non-disabled, young adults completed 19, 1-minute wheelchair propulsion trials at self-selected speeds with a wheelchair equipped with a SMARTwheel (SW) device while being video recorded. Participants also wore 2 ActiGraph accelerometers, one on the wrist and one on the upper arm. Video footage enabled manual counting of the number of pushes (gold standard). Total pushes were averaged across 16 workloads (3 trials of repeated workloads were excluded) for each device and compared to manually counted pushes.\nResults: Compared to manually counted pushes, SW demonstrated the greatest accuracy (mean difference [MD] compared to video of 2.3 pushes [4.5% error]) and precision (standard deviation of the mean difference [SDMD]) compared to video of 4 pushes, (Coefficient of Variation [CV] =.04), followed by the upper arm-worn accelerometer (MD of 4.4 pushes [10.4% error] and SDMD of 10, [CV= .06]) and the wrist-worn accelerometer (MD of 12.6 pushes [27.8% error] and SDMD of 13 [CV=.15]).\nConclusions: SW demonstrated greater accuracy and precision than ActiGraph accelerometers placed on the upper arm and wrist. The accelerometer placed on the upper arm was more accurate and precise than the accelerometer placed on the wrist. Future investigations should be conducted to identify the source(s) of inaccuracy among wearable push counters.","PeriodicalId":73459,"journal":{"name":"International journal of medical students","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of medical students","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/ijms.2023.1950","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: There has been a growing interest in “Lifestyle Physical Activity” (LPA) among wheelchair users. LPA can be quantified via “pushes” as an outcome metric. This study examined the accuracy and precision of research-grade devices for counting pushes across a series of wheelchair propulsion trials. Methods: Eleven non-disabled, young adults completed 19, 1-minute wheelchair propulsion trials at self-selected speeds with a wheelchair equipped with a SMARTwheel (SW) device while being video recorded. Participants also wore 2 ActiGraph accelerometers, one on the wrist and one on the upper arm. Video footage enabled manual counting of the number of pushes (gold standard). Total pushes were averaged across 16 workloads (3 trials of repeated workloads were excluded) for each device and compared to manually counted pushes. Results: Compared to manually counted pushes, SW demonstrated the greatest accuracy (mean difference [MD] compared to video of 2.3 pushes [4.5% error]) and precision (standard deviation of the mean difference [SDMD]) compared to video of 4 pushes, (Coefficient of Variation [CV] =.04), followed by the upper arm-worn accelerometer (MD of 4.4 pushes [10.4% error] and SDMD of 10, [CV= .06]) and the wrist-worn accelerometer (MD of 12.6 pushes [27.8% error] and SDMD of 13 [CV=.15]). Conclusions: SW demonstrated greater accuracy and precision than ActiGraph accelerometers placed on the upper arm and wrist. The accelerometer placed on the upper arm was more accurate and precise than the accelerometer placed on the wrist. Future investigations should be conducted to identify the source(s) of inaccuracy among wearable push counters.
在一系列非残疾青年轮椅推进试验中,活动记录仪和智能轮测量推数的准确性和精度
背景:轮椅使用者对“生活方式体力活动”(LPA)的兴趣日益浓厚。LPA可以通过“推动”作为结果度量来量化。本研究通过一系列轮椅推进试验检验了科研级计数装置的准确性和精度。方法:11名非残疾的年轻成人在配有SMARTwheel (SW)装置的轮椅上以自行选择的速度完成了19,1分钟的轮椅推进试验,并进行了录像。参与者还佩戴了两个ActiGraph加速计,一个在手腕上,一个在上臂上。视频片段启用手动计数推数(黄金标准)。每个设备的总推送被平均为16个工作负载(3个重复工作负载的试验被排除在外),并与手动计数推送进行比较。结果:与手动计数的推数相比,SW显示出最高的准确性(平均差值[MD]与2.3次推数的视频相比[4.5%误差])和精度(平均差值[SDMD]的标准差)与4次推数的视频相比(变异系数[CV] =.04),其次是上臂佩戴的加速度计(MD为4.4次推数[10.4%误差]和SDMD为10次,[CV=. 06])和手腕佩戴的加速度计(MD为12.6次推数[27.8%误差]和SDMD为13次[CV=.15])。结论:SW比放置在上臂和手腕上的ActiGraph加速度计具有更高的准确性和精度。放置在上臂上的加速度计比放置在手腕上的加速度计更准确和精确。未来的调查应该进行,以确定不准确的来源(s)在可穿戴式推计数器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信