RT info:eu-repo/semantics/article
T1 Validation of ActiGraph and Fitbit in the assessment of energy expenditure in Huntington's disease
A1 Simón Vicente, Lucía
A1 Rodríguez Fernández, Alejandro
A1 Rivadeneyra Posadas, Jéssica Jannett
A1 Soto Célix, María .
A1 Raya-González, Javier
A1 Castillo, Daniel
A1 Calvo Simal, Sara
A1 Mariscal, Natividad
A1 García Bustillo, Álvaro
A1 Aguado, Laura
A1 Cubo Delgado, Esther
K1 Health promotion
K1 Physical activity
K1 Activity monitor
K1 Rehabilitation
K1 Exercise
K1 Validation
K1 Sistema nervioso-Enfermedades
K1 Nervous system-Diseases
K1 Medicina
K1 Medicine
K1 Terapéutica
K1 Therapeutics
K1 Neurología
K1 Neurology
AB Background: Consumer and research activity monitors have become popular because of their ability to quantifyenergy expenditure (EE) in free-living conditions. However, the accuracy of activity trackers in determining EE inpeople with Huntington’s Disease (HD) is unknown.Research question:Can the ActiGraph wGT3X-B or the Fitbit Charge 4 accurately measure energy expenditure during physicalactivity, 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, runningon 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. Fitbitsignificantly overestimated EE, and ActiGraph underestimated EE compared to IC, but ActiGraph estimates weremore accurate than Fitbit in all tests.Significance: Compared to IC, Fitbit Charge 4 and ActiGraph wGT3X-BT have reduced accuracy in estimating EEat slower walking speeds. These findings highlight the need for population-specific algorithms and validation ofactivity trackers.
PB Elsevier
SN 0966-6362
YR 2024
FD 2024-03
LK http://hdl.handle.net/10259/8857
UL http://hdl.handle.net/10259/8857
LA spa
NO The research leading to these results has received funding from “la Caixa” Foundation and Caja de Burgos Foundation, under agreement LCF/PR/PR18/51130008".
DS Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Burgos
RD 08-may-2024