Cargando…

Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer

Accelerometer-based activity monitors are popular for monitoring physical activity. In this study, we investigated optimal sensor placement for increasing the quality of studies that utilize accelerometer data to assess physical activity. We performed a two-staged study, focused on sensor location a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boerema, Simone T., van Velsen, Lex, Schaake, Leendert, Tönis, Thijs M., Hermens, Hermie J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3958275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24553085
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s140203188
_version_ 1782307840466092032
author Boerema, Simone T.
van Velsen, Lex
Schaake, Leendert
Tönis, Thijs M.
Hermens, Hermie J.
author_facet Boerema, Simone T.
van Velsen, Lex
Schaake, Leendert
Tönis, Thijs M.
Hermens, Hermie J.
author_sort Boerema, Simone T.
collection PubMed
description Accelerometer-based activity monitors are popular for monitoring physical activity. In this study, we investigated optimal sensor placement for increasing the quality of studies that utilize accelerometer data to assess physical activity. We performed a two-staged study, focused on sensor location and type of mounting. Ten subjects walked at various walking speeds on a treadmill, performed a deskwork protocol, and walked on level ground, while simultaneously wearing five ProMove2 sensors with a snug fit on an elastic waist belt. We found that sensor location, type of activity, and their interaction-effect affected sensor output. The most lateral positions on the waist belt were the least sensitive for interference. The effect of mounting was explored, by making two subjects repeat the experimental protocol with sensors more loosely fitted to the elastic belt. The loose fit resulted in lower sensor output, except for the deskwork protocol, where output was higher. In order to increase the reliability and to reduce the variability of sensor output, researchers should place activity sensors on the most lateral position of a participant's waist belt. If the sensor hampers free movement, it may be positioned slightly more forward on the belt. Finally, sensors should be fitted tightly to the body.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3958275
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI)
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39582752014-03-20 Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer Boerema, Simone T. van Velsen, Lex Schaake, Leendert Tönis, Thijs M. Hermens, Hermie J. Sensors (Basel) Article Accelerometer-based activity monitors are popular for monitoring physical activity. In this study, we investigated optimal sensor placement for increasing the quality of studies that utilize accelerometer data to assess physical activity. We performed a two-staged study, focused on sensor location and type of mounting. Ten subjects walked at various walking speeds on a treadmill, performed a deskwork protocol, and walked on level ground, while simultaneously wearing five ProMove2 sensors with a snug fit on an elastic waist belt. We found that sensor location, type of activity, and their interaction-effect affected sensor output. The most lateral positions on the waist belt were the least sensitive for interference. The effect of mounting was explored, by making two subjects repeat the experimental protocol with sensors more loosely fitted to the elastic belt. The loose fit resulted in lower sensor output, except for the deskwork protocol, where output was higher. In order to increase the reliability and to reduce the variability of sensor output, researchers should place activity sensors on the most lateral position of a participant's waist belt. If the sensor hampers free movement, it may be positioned slightly more forward on the belt. Finally, sensors should be fitted tightly to the body. Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) 2014-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3958275/ /pubmed/24553085 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s140203188 Text en © 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Boerema, Simone T.
van Velsen, Lex
Schaake, Leendert
Tönis, Thijs M.
Hermens, Hermie J.
Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer
title Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer
title_full Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer
title_fullStr Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer
title_full_unstemmed Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer
title_short Optimal Sensor Placement for Measuring Physical Activity with a 3D Accelerometer
title_sort optimal sensor placement for measuring physical activity with a 3d accelerometer
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3958275/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24553085
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s140203188
work_keys_str_mv AT boeremasimonet optimalsensorplacementformeasuringphysicalactivitywitha3daccelerometer
AT vanvelsenlex optimalsensorplacementformeasuringphysicalactivitywitha3daccelerometer
AT schaakeleendert optimalsensorplacementformeasuringphysicalactivitywitha3daccelerometer
AT tonisthijsm optimalsensorplacementformeasuringphysicalactivitywitha3daccelerometer
AT hermenshermiej optimalsensorplacementformeasuringphysicalactivitywitha3daccelerometer