Evaluation of the ability of three physical activity monitors to predict weight change and estimate energy expenditure

Abstract

Activity monitors such as the Actical accelerometer, the Sensewear armband, and the Intelligent Device for Energy Expenditure and Activity (IDEEA) are commonly validated against gold standards (e.g., doubly labeled water, or DLW) to determine whether they accurately measure total daily energy expenditure (TEE) or activity energy expenditure (AEE). However, little research has assessed whether these parameters or others (e.g., posture allocation) predict body weight change over time. The aims of this study were to (i) test whether estimated energy expenditure or posture allocation from the devices was associated with weight change during and following a low-calorie diet (LCD) and (ii) compare free-living TEE and AEE predictions from the devices against DLW before weight change. Eighty-seven participants from 2 clinical trials wore 2 of the 3 devices simultaneously for 1 week of a 2-week DLW period. Participants then completed an 8-week LCD and were weighed at the start and end of the LCD and 6 and 12 months after the LCD. More time spent walking at baseline, measured by the IDEEA, significantly predicted greater weight loss during the 8-week LCD. Measures of posture allocation demonstrated medium effect sizes in their relationships with weight change. Bland-Altman analyses indicated that the Sensewear and the IDEEA accurately estimated TEE, and the IDEEA accurately measured AEE. The results suggest that the ability of energy expenditure and posture allocation to predict weight change is limited, and the accuracy of TEE and AEE measurements varies across activity monitoring devices, with multi-sensor monitors demonstrating stronger validity. HHS Public AccessAuthor manuscript Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2017 July 01.

How well do activity monitors estimate energy expenditure? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the validity of current technologies

“…Four studies could not be synthesised by meta-analysis as mean difference between activity monitors and criterion measurements were not provided12 31–33; thus, 60 studies were included in the meta-analysis (figure 1). 10 13 34–88 A total of 1946 participants were included, with a mean age of 35 years (range 20–86 years). The mean body mass index (BMI) was 24.9 kg/m 2 (range 21.8–31.6 kg/m 2 ).…”

Validity of Accelerometers for the Evaluation of Energy Expenditure in Obese and Overweight Individuals: A Systematic Review

“…However, in 8 studies [9,25,28,33,34,36,37,40], it was judged as high for index test and gold standard items, due to the absence of an at least 2 hours of fasting period and/or an at least 15 minutes of resting period before the test. In 5 studies, the risk of bias was judged as high for the lack of individuals included in the final analysis, due to technical problems with the accelerometers [9,29,38], or because they did not finish the accelerometer assessment or the DLW dosing period [27,35]. Referring to concerns with the applicability of the proposed test, the risk was judged as low for index test and gold standard, but the majority of studies presented an issue in the patient selection [9,25,[27][28][29][30][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] due to not having excluded smoking individuals and/ or individuals taking medication that could affect EE.…”

“…In the study of Correa et al, participants were recruited from two clinical trials aimed to weight loss. e first trial enrolled only participants whose BMI was >25 and <40, while the second trial enrolled participants whose BMI was >18.5 and <40 [27]. Five studies recruited healthy volunteers whose mean BMI was indicative of overweight/obese status [26,28,33,35,38].…”

“…Five included studies performed Bland-Altman analysis for comparing EE measured by IC and accelometers [9,27,32,35,41].…”

07 / How well do activity monitors estimate energy expenditure? A systematic review and meta-analysis (2)

“…; thus, 60 studies were included in the meta-analysis (figure 1)[10,13,[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50]20,[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60]34,[61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70]35,[71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80]36,[81][82][83][84][85]…”