Validity of Wrist-Wearable Activity Devices for Estimating Physical Activity in Adolescents: Comparative Study

Background The rapid advancements in science and technology of wrist-wearable activity devices offer considerable potential for clinical applications. Self-monitoring of physical activity (PA) with activity devices is helpful to improve the PA levels of adolescents. However, knowing the accuracy of activity devices in adolescents is necessary to identify current levels of PA and assess the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to increase PA. Objective The study aimed to determine the validity of the 11 commercially available wrist-wearable activity devices for monitoring total steps and total 24-hour total energy expenditure (TEE) in healthy adolescents under simulated free-living conditions. Methods Nineteen (10 male and 9 female) participants aged 14 to 18 years performed a 24-hour activity cycle in a metabolic chamber. Each participant simultaneously wore 11 commercial wrist-wearable activity devices (Mi Band 2 [XiaoMi], B2 [Huawei], Bong 2s [Meizu], Amazfit [Huamei], Flex [Fitbit], UP3 [Jawbone], Shine 2 [Misfit], GOLiFE Care-X [GoYourLife], Pulse O2 [Withings], Vivofit [Garmin], and Loop [Polar Electro]) and one research-based triaxial accelerometer (GT3X+ [ActiGraph]). Criterion measures were total EE from the metabolic chamber (mcTEE) and total steps from the GT3X+ (AGsteps). Results Pearson correlation coefficients r for 24-hour TEE ranged from .78 (Shine 2, Amazfit) to .96 (Loop) and for steps ranged from 0.20 (GOLiFE) to 0.57 (Vivofit). Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) for TEE ranged from 5.7% (Mi Band 2) to 26.4% (Amazfit) and for steps ranged from 14.2% (Bong 2s) to 27.6% (Loop). TEE estimates from the Mi Band 2, UP3, Vivofit, and Bong 2s were equivalent to mcTEE. Total steps from the Bong 2s were equivalent to AGsteps. Conclusions Overall, the Bong 2s had the best accuracy for estimating TEE and total steps under simulated free-living conditions. Further research is needed to examine the validity of these devices in different types of physical activities under real-world conditions.

[1]  M. McNarry,et al.  Feasibility and Effectiveness of Using Wearable Activity Trackers in Youth: A Systematic Review , 2016, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[2]  E. Melanson,et al.  Validation of the doubly labeled water method using off-axis integrated cavity output spectroscopy and isotope ratio mass spectrometry. , 2018, American journal of physiology. Endocrinology and metabolism.

[3]  P. Dixon,et al.  A Primer on the Use of Equivalence Testing for Evaluating Measurement Agreement , 2017, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[4]  Hyun-Sung An,et al.  Concurrent Validity of Wearable Activity Trackers Under Free-Living Conditions , 2017, Journal of strength and conditioning research.

[5]  Tim Olds,et al.  The validity of consumer-level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free-living conditions: a cross-sectional study , 2015, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[6]  B. Ainsworth,et al.  Descriptive epidemiology of pedometer-determined physical activity. , 2004, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[7]  Saifuddin Ahmed,et al.  Adolescent physical activities as predictors of young adult weight. , 2008, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[8]  Sheng-Xia Ma,et al.  Metabolic Effects of Three Different Activity Bouts during Sitting in Inactive Adults. , 2019, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[9]  C. Mazzà,et al.  Step Detection and Activity Recognition Accuracy of Seven Physical Activity Monitors , 2015, PloS one.

[10]  Klaus Gebel,et al.  Validity and Reliability of Fitbit Flex for Step Count, Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity and Activity Energy Expenditure , 2016, PloS one.

[11]  Roger G. Eston,et al.  Children's physical activity assessed with wrist- and hip-worn accelerometers. , 2014, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[12]  Dinesh John,et al.  Comment on "estimating activity and sedentary behavior from an accelerometer on the hip and wrist". , 2013, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[13]  Junkai Xu,et al.  Validity of FitBit, Jawbone UP, Nike+ and other wearable devices for level and stair walking. , 2016, Gait & posture.

[14]  M. Järvelin,et al.  Physical activity and social status in adolescence as predictors of physical inactivity in adulthood. , 2003, Preventive medicine.

[15]  U. Ekelund,et al.  Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects , 2012, The Lancet.

[16]  B. Popkin,et al.  Time use and physical activity: a shift away from movement across the globe , 2012, Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity.

[17]  Richard P Troiano,et al.  Evolution of accelerometer methods for physical activity research , 2014, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[18]  Nicolas Farina,et al.  The Validity of Consumer-Level Activity Monitors in Healthy Older Adults in Free-Living Conditions. , 2018, Journal of aging and physical activity.

[19]  Xiang Fan,et al.  Physical activity among Chinese school-aged children: National prevalence estimates from the 2016 Physical Activity and Fitness in China—The Youth Study , 2017, Journal of sport and health science.

[20]  D. Bassett,et al.  Comparison of four ActiGraph accelerometers during walking and running. , 2010, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[21]  B. Ainsworth,et al.  International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. , 2003, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[22]  Raymond C Browning,et al.  A comparison of energy expenditure estimation of several physical activity monitors. , 2013, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[23]  Andrea M. Comptour,et al.  Validity and reliability of Fitbit activity monitors compared to ActiGraph GT3X+ with female adults in a free-living environment. , 2017, Journal of science and medicine in sport.

[24]  A. Roza,et al.  The Harris Benedict equation reevaluated: resting energy requirements and the body cell mass. , 1984, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[25]  Yoshio Nakata,et al.  Accuracy of Wearable Devices for Estimating Total Energy Expenditure: Comparison With Metabolic Chamber and Doubly Labeled Water Method. , 2016, JAMA internal medicine.

[26]  Alvaro Gauterin,et al.  Comparison of wrist-worn Fitbit Flex and waist-worn ActiGraph for measuring steps in free-living adults , 2017, PloS one.

[27]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Decomposing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for exercise: Application to stages of motivational readiness , 2007 .

[28]  R. Ross,et al.  Visceral fat and liver fat are independent predictors of metabolic risk factors in men. , 2003, American journal of physiology. Endocrinology and metabolism.

[29]  Shuqiao Yao,et al.  Associations between physical inactivity and sedentary behaviors among adolescents in 10 cities in China , 2014, BMC Public Health.

[30]  GREGORY J. WELK,et al.  Standardizing Analytic Methods and Reporting in Activity Monitor Validation Studies , 2019, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[31]  Scott E Crouter,et al.  Validity of 10 electronic pedometers for measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. , 2003, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[32]  Matthew P Buman,et al.  Twenty-four Hours of Sleep, Sedentary Behavior, and Physical Activity with Nine Wearable Devices. , 2016, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[33]  J. Schwartz,et al.  Abstract MP11: Fitbit: An Accurate and Reliable Device for Wireless Physical Activity Tracking , 2015 .

[34]  Skip M. Williams,et al.  Concurrent validation of the Actigraph gt3x+, Polar Active accelerometer, Omron HJ-720 and Yamax Digiwalker SW-701 pedometer step counts in lab-based and free-living settings , 2015, Journal of sports sciences.

[35]  D. Blazer Social support and mortality in an elderly community population. , 1982, American journal of epidemiology.

[36]  U. Ekelund,et al.  Comparison of two Actigraph models for assessing free-living physical activity in Indian adolescents , 2007, Journal of sports sciences.

[37]  Gregory M Dominick,et al.  Physical Activity Assessment Between Consumer- and Research-Grade Accelerometers: A Comparative Study in Free-Living Conditions , 2016, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.