2026-08-17T19:41:58Zhttps://riubu.ubu.es/oai/request

oai:riubu.ubu.es:10259/88572024-03-21T01:05:14Zcom_10259_7575com_10259_3989com_10259.4_106com_10259_2604com_10259_7328com_10259_4219com_10259_5086col_10259_7576col_10259_7329col_10259_4220

Simón Vicente, Lucía Rodríguez Fernández, Alejandro Rivadeneyra Posadas, Jéssica Jannett Soto Célix, María . Raya-González, Javier Castillo, Daniel Calvo Simal, Sara Mariscal, Natividad García Bustillo, Álvaro Aguado, Laura Cubo Delgado, Esther 2024-03-20T11:19:13Z 2024-03-20T11:19:13Z 2024-03 0966-6362 http://hdl.handle.net/10259/8857 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.01.028 Background: Consumer and research activity monitors have become popular because of their ability to quantify energy expenditure (EE) in free-living conditions. However, the accuracy of activity trackers in determining EE in people with Huntington’s Disease (HD) is unknown. Research question: Can the ActiGraph wGT3X-B or the Fitbit Charge 4 accurately measure energy expenditure during physical activity, in people with HD compared to Indirect Calorimetry (IC) (Medisoft Ergo Card)? Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, observational study with fourteen participants with mild-moderate HD (mean age 55.7 ± 11.4 years). All participants wore an ActiGraph and Fitbit during an incremental test, running on a treadmill at 3.2 km/h and 5.2 km/h for three minutes at each speed. We analysed and compared the accuracy of EE estimates obtained by Fitbit and ActiGraph against the EE estimates obtained by a metabolic cart, using with Intra-class correlation (ICC), Bland-Altman analysis and correlation tests. Results: A significant correlation and a moderate reliability was found between ActiGraph and IC for the incremental test (r = 0.667)(ICC=0.633). There was a significant correlation between Fitbit and IC during the incremental test (r = 0.701), but the reliability was poor at all tested speeds in the treadmill walk. Fitbit significantly overestimated EE, and ActiGraph underestimated EE compared to IC, but ActiGraph estimates were more accurate than Fitbit in all tests. Significance: Compared to IC, Fitbit Charge 4 and ActiGraph wGT3X-BT have reduced accuracy in estimating EE at slower walking speeds. These findings highlight the need for population-specific algorithms and validation of activity trackers. The research leading to these results has received funding from “la Caixa” Foundation and Caja de Burgos Foundation, under agreement LCF/PR/PR18/51130008". application/pdf spa Elsevier Gait & Posture. 2024, V. 109, p. 89-94 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2024.01.028 Atribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Health promotion Physical activity Activity monitor Rehabilitation Exercise Validation Sistema nervioso-Enfermedades Medicina Terapéutica Neurología Nervous system-Diseases Medicine Therapeutics Neurology Validation of ActiGraph and Fitbit in the assessment of energy expenditure in Huntington's disease info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Gait & Posture 109 89 94