4th Annual WML Academic Symposium

PURPOSE: To assess the validity of five accelerometers that estimate the distance of 1.5 miles while jogging at a speed of 5.0 mph and 6.0 mph. METHODS: A total of 27 (13 male and 14 female) participants completed this study between the ages of 18-25 years with a BMI less than 30 kg.m-2. Height, weight, blood pressure, and heart rate were measured before exercising. A Mio Step 1 pedometer was placed on the right hip, a Polar Stride Sensor was placed on the right shoe with a corresponding watch on the right wrist, a Nike Plus Sportband was placed on the left wrist with a corresponding foot sensor on the left shoe, a Philips Activa pedometer was placed on the upper left arm, and a Perform Tek prototype sensor was placed in the right ear for a total of 5 accelerometers. The accelerometers were started simultaneously and the participants jogged 6 laps around a 400 m (2.41 km) track, which was measured by a Keson RR112 Roadrunner 1 measuring wheel. Pace was maintained by the research assistants using a stop watch at 5.0 mph for the first 3 laps and 6.0 mph for the last 3 laps. After completion, the distance was obtained from the accelerometers and compared to the distance of the track. RESULTS: The Nike (2.30 + 0.56 km) and Polar (2.37 + 0.24 km) accelerometers were the most accurate compared to the measured distance of 2.41 km. The Philips, Mio, and Perform Tek were the least accurate and measured 2.74 +/- 0.31 km, 1.98 +/- 0.36 km, and 2.93 +/- 0.59 km, respectively. CONCLUSION: Foot placement accelerometers appear to be more accurate when measuring distance compared to hip, wrist, or ear placed accelerometers. However, this placement may not be more accurate for assessing heart rate or caloric expenditure.