Search Results

The purpose of this study was to develop a compendium of wheelchair-related physical activities. To accomplish this, we conducted a systematic review of the published energy costs of activities performed by individuals who use wheelchairs. A total of 266 studies were identified by a literature search using relevant keywords. Inclusion criteria were studies utilizing individuals who routinely use a manual wheelchair, indirect calorimetry as the criterion measurement, energy expenditure expressed as METs or VO₂, and physical activities typical of wheelchair users. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 63 different wheelchair activities were identified with energy expenditure values ranging from 0.8 to 12.5 kcal·kg^-1·hr^-1. The energy requirements for some activities differed between individuals who use wheelchairs and those who do not. The compendium of wheelchair-related activities can be used to enhance scoring of physical activity surveys and to promote the benefits of activity in this population.

Speed of movement has been shown to affect the validity of physical activity (PA) monitors during locomotion. Speed of movement may also affect the validity of accelerometer-based PA monitors during other types of exercise. Purpose: To assess the ability of the Atlas Wearables Wristband2 (a PA monitor developed specifically for resistance training [RT] exercise) to identify the individual RT exercise type and count repetitions during RT exercises at various movement speeds. Methods: 50 male and female participants completed seven sets of 10 repetitions for five different upper/lower body RT exercises while wearing a Wristband2 on the left wrist. The speed of each set was completed at different metronome-paced speeds ranging from a slow speed of 4 sec·rep⁻¹ to a fast speed of 1 sec·rep⁻¹. Repeated Measures ANOVAs were used to compare the actual exercise type/number of repetitions among the seven different speeds. Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) and bias were calculated for repetition counting. Results: For each exercise, there tended to be significant differences between the slower speeds and the fastest speed for activity type identification and repetition counting (p < .05). Across all exercises, the highest accuracy for activity type identification (91 ± 1.8% correct overall), repetition counting (8.77 ± 0.17 of 10 reps overall) and the lowest MAPE (14 ± 1.7% overall) and bias (−1.23 ± 0.17 reps overall) occurred during the 1.5 sec·rep⁻¹ speed (the second fastest speed tested). Conclusions: The validity of the Atlas Wearables Wristband2 to identify exercise type and count repetitions varied based on the speed of movement during RT exercises.

Background: Previous research studies have found that heart rate monitors that predict maximal oxygen consumption ( $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ ) are valid for males but overestimate $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ in females. Inaccurate self-reported physical activity (PA) levels may affect the validity of the prediction algorithm used to predict $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ . Purpose: To investigate the validity of the Polar M430 in predicting $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ among females with varying PA levels. Methods: Polar M430 was used to predict $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ ( $\mathrm{p}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ ) for 43 healthy female study participants (26.9 ± 1.3 years), under three conditions: the participant’s self-selected PA category (sPA), one PA category below the sPA (sPA − 1), and one category above the sPA (sPA + 1). Indirect calorimetry was utilized to measure $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ ( $\mathrm{m}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ ) via a modified Astrand treadmill protocol. Repeated-measures analyses of covariance using age and percentage of body fat as covariates were used to detect differences between groups. Bland–Altman plots were used to assess the precision of the measurement. Results: $\mathrm{p}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ was significantly correlated with $\mathrm{m}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ (r = .695, p < .001). The mean values for $\mathrm{p}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ and $\mathrm{m}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ were 44.58 ± 9.29 and 43.98 ± 8.76, respectively. No significant differences were found between $\mathrm{m}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ , $\mathrm{p}\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ , sPA – 1, and sPA + 1 (p = .492). However, the Bland–Altman plots indicated a low level of precision with the estimate. Conclusions: The Polar M430 was a valid method to predict $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ across different sPA levels in females. Moreover, an under/overestimation in sPA had little effect on the predicted $\dot{\mathrm{V}}{\mathrm{O}}_2\text{max}$ .

Background: Resistance training (RT) is an integral component of physical activity guidelines, but methods for the objective assessment of RT have been limited. Recently, the Atlas Wearables Wristband2 has been marketed to measure RT, but its reliability is unknown. Purpose: To determine the reliability of the Wristband2 for measuring RT exercises. Methods: Participants (n = 62) aged 18–52 yrs. wore two Wristband2 monitors on the left wrist and performed 2 sets of 12 repetitions of 14 different resistance training exercises. Test-retest reliability was determined by calculating percent agreement for exercise type and for repetitions recorded by a single Wristband2 between sets 1 and 2 for each exercise, and inter-monitor reliability was determined by calculating percent agreement for exercise type and for repetitions recorded by both Wristband2 monitors in set 1 of each exercise. Results: Test-retest reliability for exercise type was 80.0 ± 1.0% (lowest: 69.4% for bench press; highest: 95.2% for biceps curls) and for repetition count was 47.9 ± 2.2% (lowest: 19.4% for calf raises; highest: 82.3% for lateral raises). Inter-monitor reliability for exercise type was 80.4 ± 1.3% (lowest: 66.1% for bench press; highest: 95.2% for biceps curls) and for repetition count was 59.6 ± 2.2% (lowest: 32.3% for calf raises; highest: 88.7% for lateral raises). Subgroup analyses by gender, RT experience, and participant height revealed minimal differences in reliability. Repetition agreement of ≤1 repetition increased test-retest reliability to 74.7% and inter-monitor reliability to 83.7%. Conclusion: The Wristband2 had acceptable test-retest and inter-monitor reliability for the majority of exercises tested and for counting repetitions to within 1 repetition/set.

Background: Devices for monitoring physical activity have focused mainly on measuring aerobic activity; however, the 2018 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans also recommend muscle-resistance training two or more days per week. Recently, a wrist-worn activity monitor, the Atlas Wristband2, was developed to recognize resistance training exercises. Purpose: To assess the ability of the Wristband2 to identify the type and number of repetitions of resistance training exercises, when worn on the left wrist as directed by the manufacturer, and when worn on the right wrist. Methods: While wearing monitors on both wrists, 159 participants completed a circuit-style workout consisting of two sets of 12 repetitions of 14 different resistance training exercises. Data from the monitors were used to determine classification accuracies for identifying exercise type verses direct observation. The average repetitions and mean absolute error (MAE) for repetitions were calculated for each exercise. Results: The Wristband2 classification accuracy for exercise type was 78.4 ± 2.5%, ranging from 54.7 ± 3.4% (dumbbell [DB] bench press) to 97.5 ± 1.0% (DB biceps curls), when worn on the left wrist. An average of 11.0 ± 0.2 repetitions, ranging from 9.0 ± 0.3 repetitions (DB lunges) to 11.9 ± 0.1 repetitions (push-ups), were identified. For all exercises, MAE ranged from 0.0–4.6 repetitions. When worn on the right wrist, exercise type classification accuracy dropped to 24.2 ± 5.1%, and repetitions decreased to 8.1 ± 0.8 out of 12. Conclusions: The Wristband2, worn on the left wrist, had acceptable exercise classification and repetition counting capabilities for many of the 14 exercises used in this study, and may be a useful tool to objectively track resistance training.