4.7 Article

Commercially available pedometers: considerations for accurate step counting

Journal

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages 361-368

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.01.032

Keywords

physical activity; walking; treadmill; motion sensors; movement

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [RR00585] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK42549, DK48520, R01 DK56650] Funding Source: Medline
  3. BHP HRSA HHS [R01 DH63226] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Many commercially available pedometers undercount, especially at slower speeds. We examined the effects of age, obesity, and self-selected walking speed on pedometer accuracy. We also compared the accuracy of piezoelectric and spring-levered pedometers at slow walking speeds. Methods. Study 1: 259 subjects walked on a motorized treadmill at two self-selected walking speeds. Steps were counted using a spring-levered pedometer. Study 2: 32 subjects walked on a motorized treadmill at slow walking (1.0-2.6 MPH) speeds. Steps were counted using spring-levered and piezoelectric pedometers. Results. Study 1: self-selected walking speed and pedometer accuracy decreased with increasing age, weight, and body mass index (BMI). Accuracy was 71% below 2.0 MPH, 74-91% between 2.0 and 3.0 MPH, and 96% above 3.0 MPH. Decreased accuracy was best predicted by increasing age. Study 2: between 1.8 and 2.0 MPH, the accuracy of the piezoelectric pedometer ( > 97%) exceeded that of the spring-levered pedometers (52-95%). Even at 1.0 MPH, accuracy of the piezoelectric pedometer (56.4 +/- 33.8%) was superior to the spring-levered pedometers (7-20%). Conclusion. Accuracy of all pedometers tested exceeded 96% at speeds 3.0 MPH, but decreased at slower walking speeds. In individuals that naturally ambulate at slower walking speeds (e.g., elderly), we recommend the use of more sensitive (e.g., piezoelectric) pedometers. (C) 2004 The Institute For Cancer Prevention and Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available