Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for :

  • Author: Stephen D. Herrmann x
  • Sport and Exercise Science/Kinesiology x
Clear All Modify Search
Open access

Stephen D. Herrmann and Karin A. Pfeiffer

Restricted access

Stephen D. Herrmann, Tiago V. Barreira, Minsoo Kang and Barbara E. Ainsworth

Background:

There is little consensus on how many hours of accelerometer wear time is needed to reflect a usual day. This study identifies the bias in daily physical activity (PA) estimates caused by accelerometer wear time.

Methods:

124 adults (age = 41 ± 11 years; BMI = 27 ± 7 kg·m-2) contributed approximately 1,200 days accelerometer wear time. Five 40 day samples were randomly selected with 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 h·d-1 of wear time. Four semisimulation data sets (10, 11, 12, 13 h·d-1) were created from the reference 14 h·d-1 data set to assess Absolute Percent Error (APE). Repeated-measures ANOVAs compared min·d-1 between 10, 11, 12, 13 h·d-1 and the reference 14 h·d-1 for inactivity (<100 cts·min-1), light (100−1951 cts·min-1), moderate (1952−5724 cts·min-1), and vigorous (≥5725 cts·min-1) PA.

Results:

APE ranged from 5.6%−41.6% (10 h·d-1 = 28.2%−41.6%; 11 h·d-1 = 20.3%−36.0%; 12 h·d-1 = 13.5%−14.3%; 13 h·d-1 = 5.6%−7.8%). Min·d-1 differences were observed for inactivity, light, and moderate PA between 10, 11, 12, and 13 h·d-1 and the reference (P < .05).

Conclusions:

This suggests a minimum accelerometer wear time of 13 h·d-1 is needed to provide a valid measure of daily PA when 14 h·d-1 is used as a reference.

Open access

Jeffery J. Honas, Erik A. Willis, Stephen D. Herrmann, Jerry L. Greene, Richard A. Washburn and Joseph E. Donnelly

Background:

There is limited data regarding objectively measured energy cost and intensity of classroom instruction. Therefore, the purpose of current study was to objectively measure energy cost and subsequently calculate MET values using a portable indirect calorimeter (IC) for both normal classroom instruction (NCI) and active classroom instruction (ACI).

Methods:

We assessed energy expenditure (EE) and intensity levels (METs) in elementary school children (17 boys and 15 girls) using an IC (COSMED K4b2). Independent t-tests were used to evaluate potential sex and grade level differences for age, BMI, VO2, EE, and METs.

Results:

The average EE for NCI and ACI were 1.8 ± 0.4 and 3.9 ± 1.0, respectively. The average intensity level for NCI and ACI were 1.9 ± 0.4 and 4.2 ± 0.9 METs, respectively.

Conclusions:

PA delivered through ACI can elicit EE at a moderate intensity level. These results provide evidence for ACI as a convenient/feasible avenue for increasing PA in youth without decreasing instruction time.

Restricted access

Karin A. Pfeiffer, Kathleen B. Watson, Robert G. McMurray, David R. Bassett, Nancy F. Butte, Scott E. Crouter, Stephen D. Herrmann, Stewart G. Trost, Barbara E. Ainsworth, Janet E. Fulton, David Berrigan and For the CDC/NCI/NCCOR Research Group

Purpose: This study compared the accuracy of physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) prediction using 2 methods of accounting for age dependency versus 1 standard (single) value across all ages. Methods: PAEE estimates were derived by pooling data from 5 studies. Participants, 6–18 years (n = 929), engaged in 14 activities while in a room calorimeter or wearing a portable metabolic analyzer. Linear regression was used to estimate the measurement error in PAEE (expressed as youth metabolic equivalent) associated with using age groups (6–9, 10–12, 13–15, and 16–18 y) and age-in-years [each year of chronological age (eg, 12 = 12.0–12.99 y)] versus the standard (a single value across all ages). Results: Age groups and age-in-years showed similar error, and both showed less error than the standard method for cycling, skilled, and moderate- to vigorous-intensity activities. For sedentary and light activities, the standard had similar error to the other 2 methods. Mean values for root mean square error ranged from 0.2 to 1.7 youth metabolic equivalent across all activities. Error reduction ranged from −0.2% to 21.7% for age groups and −0.23% to 18.2% for age-in-years compared with the standard. Conclusions: Accounting for age showed lower errors than a standard (single) value; using an age-dependent model in the Youth Compendium is recommended.