Validity of Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers for Estimating VO 2max and Energy Expenditure

Stefanie Passler, Julian Bohrer, Lukas Blöchinger and Veit Senner
Additional contact information
Stefanie Passler: Professorship of Sport Equipment and Materials, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, D-85747 Garching, Germany
Julian Bohrer: Professorship of Sport Equipment and Materials, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, D-85747 Garching, Germany
Lukas Blöchinger: Professorship of Sport Equipment and Materials, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, D-85747 Garching, Germany
Veit Senner: Professorship of Sport Equipment and Materials, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Munich, Boltzmannstraße 15, D-85747 Garching, Germany

IJERPH, 2019, vol. 16, issue 17, 1-13

Abstract: Activity trackers are a simple and mostly low-priced method to capture physiological parameters. Despite the high number of wrist-worn devices, there is a lack of scientific validation. The purpose of this study was to assess whether the activity trackers represent a valid alternative to gold-standard methods in terms of estimating energy expenditure (EE) and maximum oxygen uptake (VO 2max ). Twenty-four healthy subjects participated in this study. In total, five commercially available wrist-worn devices were tested with regard to their validity of EE and/or VO 2max . Estimated values were compared with indirect calorimetry. Validity of the activity trackers was determined by paired sample t-tests, mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE), Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, and Bland-Altman plots. Within the tested devices, differences in scattering in VO 2max and EE could be observed. This results in a MAPE > 10% for all evaluations, except for the VO 2max -estimation of the Garmin Forerunner 920XT (7.3%). The latter significantly underestimates the VO 2max (t(23) = –2.37, p = 0.027), whereas the Garmin Vivosmart HR significantly overestimates the EE (t(23) = 2.44, p = 0.023). The tested devices did not show valid results concerning the estimation of VO 2max and EE. Hence, the current wrist-worn activity trackers are most likely not accurate enough to be used for neither purposes in sports, nor in health care applications.

Keywords: consumer wearable devices; validation; accuracy; sports watches; fitness trackers; monitoring; physical activity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/17/3037/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/17/3037/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:17:p:3037-:d:259789

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().