Validity of the Polar M430 Activity Monitor in Free-Living Conditions: Validation Study

André Henriksen, Sameline Grimsgaard, Alexander Horsch, Gunnar Hartvigsen, Laila Hopstock, André Henriksen, Sameline Grimsgaard, Alexander Horsch, Gunnar Hartvigsen, Laila Hopstock

Abstract

Background: Accelerometers, often in conjunction with heart rate sensors, are extensively used to track physical activity (PA) in research. Research-grade instruments are often expensive and have limited battery capacity, limited storage, and high participant burden. Consumer-based activity trackers are equipped with similar technology and designed for long-term wear, and can therefore potentially be used in research.

Objective: We aimed to assess the criterion validity of the Polar M430 sport watch, compared with 2 research-grade instruments (ActiGraph and Actiheart), worn on 4 different locations using 1- and 3-axis accelerometers.

Methods: A total of 50 participants wore 2 ActiGraphs (wrist and hip), 2 Actihearts (upper and lower chest position), and 1 Polar M430 sport watch for 1 full day. We compared reported time (minutes) spent in sedentary behavior and in light, moderate, vigorous, and moderate to vigorous PA, step counts, activity energy expenditure, and total energy expenditure between devices. We used Pearson correlations, intraclass correlations, mean absolute percentage errors (MAPEs), and Bland-Altman plots to assess criterion validity.

Results: Pearson correlations between the Polar M430 and all research-grade instruments were moderate or stronger for vigorous PA (r range .59-.76), moderate to vigorous PA (r range .51-.75), steps (r range .85-.87), total energy expenditure (r range .88-.94), and activity energy expenditure (r range .74-.79). Bland-Altman plots showed higher agreement for higher intensities of PA. MAPE was high for most outcomes. Only total energy expenditure measured by the hip-worn ActiGraph and both Actiheart positions had acceptable or close to acceptable errors with MAPEs of 6.94% (ActiGraph, 3 axes), 8.26% (ActiGraph, 1 axis), 14.54% (Actiheart, upper position), and 14.37% (Actiheart, lower position). The wrist-worn ActiGraph had a MAPE of 15.94% for measuring steps. All other outcomes had a MAPE of 22% or higher. For most outcomes, the Polar M430 was most strongly correlated with the hip-worn triaxial ActiGraph, with a moderate or strong Pearson correlation for sedentary behavior (r=.52) and for light (r=.7), moderate (r=.57), vigorous (r=.76), and moderate to vigorous (r=.75) PA. In addition, correlations were strong or very strong for activity energy expenditure (r=.75), steps (r=.85), and total energy expenditure (r=.91).

Conclusions: The Polar M430 can potentially be used as an addition to established research-grade instruments to collect some PA variables over a prolonged period. However, due to the high MAPE of most outcomes, only total energy expenditure can be trusted to provide close to valid results. Depending on the variable, the Polar M430 over- or underreported most metrics, and may therefore be better suited to report changes in PA over time for some outcomes, rather than as an accurate instrument for PA status in a population.

Keywords: actigraphy; fitness trackers; motor activity; validation studies.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©André Henriksen, Sameline Grimsgaard, Alexander Horsch, Gunnar Hartvigsen, Laila Hopstock. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (http://formative.jmir.org), 16.08.2019.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Instrument placement and Polar M430 illustrations.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Correlation between the Polar M430 and all criterion measures for moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). CPM: counts per minute; ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient; VM: vector magnitude.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bland-Altman plots for the Polar M430 and each criterion measure for moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Numbers are mean difference and upper and lower limits of agreement (95% CI). CPM: counts per minute; VM: vector magnitude.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Correlation between the Polar M430 and each criterion measure for total energy expenditure (TEE). CPM: counts per minute; ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient; VM: vector magnitude.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Bland-Altman plots for the Polar M430 and each criterion measure for total energy expenditure (TEE). Numbers are mean difference and upper and lower limits of agreement (95% CI). CPM: counts per minute; VM: vector magnitude.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Correlations and Bland-Altman plots for the Polar M430 and the wrist-worn and hip-worn ActiGraph for steps. Numbers in the Bland-Altman plots are mean difference and upper and lower limits of agreement (95% CI). ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient.

References

    1. Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2010. [2019-08-12]. .
    1. Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC, Guthold R, Haskell W, Ekelund U, Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet. 2012 Jul 21;380(9838):247–57. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60646-1.
    1. Fysisk aktivitet blant voksne og eldre i Norge Resultater fra en kartlegging i 2008 og 2009. Report NoIS-1754. Oslo, Norway: Helsedirektoratet; 2009. [2019-08-12]. .
    1. Fysisk aktivitet og sedat tid blant voksne og eldre i Norge-Nasjonal kartlegging 2014-2015. Report No. IS-2367. Oslo, Norway: Helsedirektoratet; 2015. [2019-08-12]. .
    1. Lawrie S, Dong Y, Steins D, Xia Z, Esser P, Sun S, Li F, Amor JD, James C, Izadi H, Cao Y, Wade D, Mayo N, Dawes H, Smart Watch Activity Feedback Trial Committee (SWAFT) Evaluation of a smartwatch-based intervention providing feedback of daily activity within a research-naive stroke ward: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018;4:157. doi: 10.1186/s40814-018-0345-x.
    1. Beukenhorst AL, Parkes MJ, Cook L, Barnard R, van der Veer SN, Little MA, Howells K, Sanders C, Sergeant JC, O'Neill TW, McBeth J, Dixon WG. Collecting symptoms and sensor data with consumer smartwatches (the Knee OsteoArthritis, Linking Activity and Pain Study): protocol for a longitudinal, observational feasibility study. JMIR Res Protoc. 2019 Jan 23;8(1):e10238. doi: 10.2196/10238.
    1. Henriksen A, Haugen MM, Woldaregay AZ, Muzny M, Hartvigsen G, Hopstock LA, Grimsgaard S. Using fitness trackers and smartwatches to measure physical activity in research: analysis of consumer wrist-worn wearables. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Mar 22;20(3):e110. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9157.
    1. Ferguson T, Rowlands AV, Olds T, Maher C. The validity of consumer-level, activity monitors in healthy adults worn in free-living conditions: a cross-sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:42. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0201-9.
    1. Fokkema T, Kooiman TJM, Krijnen WP. Reliability and validity of ten consumer activity trackers depend on walking speed. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017 Apr;49(4):793–800. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001146.
    1. Kozey-Keadle S, Libertine A, Lyden K, Staudenmayer J, Freedson PS. Validation of wearable monitors for assessing sedentary behavior. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011 Aug;43(8):1561–7. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31820ce174.
    1. Peterson NE, Sirard JR, Kulbok PA, DeBoer MD, Erickson JM. Validation of accelerometer thresholds and inclinometry for measurement of sedentary behavior in young adult university students. Res Nurs Health. 2015 Dec;38(6):492–9. doi: 10.1002/nur.21694.
    1. Freedson PS, Melanson E, Sirard J. Calibration of the Computer Science and Applications, Inc. accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998 May;30(5):777–81.
    1. Sasaki JE, John D, Freedson PS. Validation and comparison of ActiGraph activity monitors. J Sci Med Sport. 2011 Sep;14(5):411–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2011.04.003.
    1. Lee JA, Williams SM, Brown DD, Laurson KR. Concurrent validation of the Actigraph gt3x+, Polar Active accelerometer, Omron HJ-720 and Yamax Digiwalker SW-701 pedometer step counts in lab-based and free-living settings. J Sports Sci. 2015;33(10):991–1000. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2014.981848.
    1. McMinn D, Acharya R, Rowe DA, Gray SR, Allan JL. Measuring activity energy expenditure: accuracy of the GT3X+ and Actiheart monitors. Int J Exerc Sci. 2013;6(3):217–229.
    1. Brage S, Brage N, Franks PW, Ekelund U, Wareham NJ. Reliability and validity of the combined heart rate and movement sensor Actiheart. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005 Apr;59(4):561–70. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602118.
    1. Brage S, Westgate K, Franks PW, Stegle O, Wright A, Ekelund U, Wareham NJ. Estimation of free-living energy expenditure by heart rate and movement sensing: a doubly-labelled water study. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0137206. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137206.
    1. Polar Flow. Kempele, Finland: Polar Electro Oy; 2018. [2019-08-08]. .
    1. Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Mâsse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M. Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008 Jan;40(1):181–8. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3.
    1. Hecht A, Ma S, Porszasz J, Casaburi R, COPD Clinical Research Network Methodology for using long-term accelerometry monitoring to describe daily activity patterns in COPD. COPD. 2009 Apr;6(2):121–9. doi: 10.1080/15412550902755044.
    1. Matthews CE, Chen KY, Freedson PS, Buchowski MS, Beech BM, Pate RR, Troiano RP. Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004. Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Apr 1;167(7):875–81. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm390.
    1. Schrack JA, Leroux A, Fleg JL, Zipunnikov V, Simonsick EM, Studenski SA, Crainiceanu C, Ferrucci L. Using heart rate and accelerometry to define quantity and intensity of physical activity in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2018 Apr 17;73(5):668–675. doi: 10.1093/gerona/gly029.
    1. Troiano RP. Large-scale applications of accelerometers: new frontiers and new questions. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Sep;39(9):1501. doi: 10.1097/mss.0b013e318150d42e.
    1. Brage S, Brage N, Franks PW, Ekelund U, Wong M, Andersen LB, Froberg K, Wareham NJ. Branched equation modeling of simultaneous accelerometry and heart rate monitoring improves estimate of directly measured physical activity energy expenditure. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2004 Jan;96(1):343–51. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00703.2003.
    1. Schofield WN. Predicting basal metabolic rate, new standards and review of previous work. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr. 1985;39 Suppl 1:5–41.
    1. Evans JD. Straightforward Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing; 1996.
    1. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
    1. Roos L, Taube W, Beeler N, Wyss T. Validity of sports watches when estimating energy expenditure during running. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2017;9:22. doi: 10.1186/s13102-017-0089-6.
    1. Nelson MB, Kaminsky LA, Dickin DC, Montoye AHK. Validity of consumer-based physical activity monitors for specific activity types. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016 Aug;48(8):1619–28. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000933.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135–60.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Craig CL, Brown WJ, Clemes SA, De Cocker K, Giles-Corti B, Hatano Y, Inoue S, Matsudo SM, Mutrie N, Oppert J, Rowe DA, Schmidt MD, Schofield GM, Spence JC, Teixeira PJ, Tully MA, Blair SN. How many steps/day are enough? For adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:79. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-79.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Barreira TV, Schuna JM. Comparison of step outputs for waist and wrist accelerometer attachment sites. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015 Apr;47(4):839–42. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000476.
    1. Ellis K, Kerr J, Godbole S, Staudenmayer J, Lanckriet G. Hip and wrist accelerometer algorithms for free-living behavior classification. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016 May;48(5):933–40. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000840.
    1. Hildebrand M, Hansen BH, Ekelund U. Age group comparability of raw accelerometer output from wrist- and hip-worn monitors. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014 Sep;46(9):1816–24. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000289.
    1. Ellis K, Kerr J, Godbole S, Lanckriet G, Wing D, Marshall S. A random forest classifier for the prediction of energy expenditure and type of physical activity from wrist and hip accelerometers. Physiol Meas. 2014 Nov;35(11):2191–203. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/35/11/2191.
    1. Poehlman ET. A review: exercise and its influence on resting energy metabolism in man. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Oct;21(5):515–25.
    1. Brage S, Brage N, Ekelund U, Luan J, Franks PW, Froberg K, Wareham NJ. Effect of combined movement and heart rate monitor placement on physical activity estimates during treadmill locomotion and free-living. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2006 Mar;96(5):517–24. doi: 10.1007/s00421-005-0112-6.
    1. Wahl Y, Düking P, Droszez A, Wahl P, Mester J. Criterion-validity of commercially available physical activity tracker to estimate step count, covered distance and energy expenditure during sports conditions. Front Physiol. 2017;8:725. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00725. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00725.
    1. Boudreaux BD, Hebert EP, Hollander DB, Williams BM, Cormier CL, Naquin MR, Gillan WW, Gusew EE, Kraemer RR. Validity of wearable activity monitors during cycling and resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2018 Mar;50(3):624–633. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001471.
    1. Brooke SM, An H, Kang S, Noble JM, Berg KE, Lee J. Concurrent validity of wearable activity trackers under free-living conditions. J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Apr;31(4):1097–1106. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001571.
    1. Boeselt T, Spielmanns M, Nell C, Storre JH, Windisch W, Magerhans L, Beutel B, Kenn K, Greulich T, Alter P, Vogelmeier C, Koczulla AR. Validity and usability of physical activity monitoring in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0157229. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157229.
    1. Hernández-Vicente A, Santos-Lozano A, De Cocker K, Garatachea N. Validation study of Polar V800 accelerometer. Ann Transl Med. 2016 Aug;4(15):278. doi: 10.21037/atm.2016.07.16. doi: 10.21037/atm.2016.07.16.
    1. Degroote L, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Verloigne M, Poppe L, Crombez G. The accuracy of smart devices for measuring physical activity in daily life: validation study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Dec 13;6(12):e10972. doi: 10.2196/10972.
    1. Wang L, Liu G, Wang Y, Li Q, Yi J, Inoue Y. Evaluation on Step Counting Performance of Wristband Activity Monitors in Daily Living Environment. IEEE Access. 2017;5:13020–13027. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2721098.
    1. An H, Jones GC, Kang S, Welk GJ, Lee J. How valid are wearable physical activity trackers for measuring steps? Eur J Sport Sci. 2017 Apr;17(3):360–368. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2016.1255261.
    1. Bunn JA, Jones C, Oliviera A, Webster MJ. Assessment of step accuracy using the Consumer Technology Association standard. J Sports Sci. 2019 Feb;37(3):244–248. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1491941.
    1. Simunek A, Dygryn J, Gaba A, Jakubec L, Stelzer J, Chmelik F. Validity of Garmin Vivofit and Polar Loop for measuring daily step counts in free-living conditions in adults. Acta Gymnica. 2016 Sep 30;46(3):129–135. doi: 10.5507/ag.2016.014.
    1. Evenson KR, Goto MM, Furberg RD. Systematic review of the validity and reliability of consumer-wearable activity trackers. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12(1):159. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0314-1.
    1. Feehan LM, Geldman J, Sayre EC, Park C, Ezzat AM, Yoo JY, Hamilton CB, Li LC. Accuracy of Fitbit devices: systematic review and narrative syntheses of quantitative data. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Aug 09;6(8):e10527. doi: 10.2196/10527.
    1. Bunn JA, Navalta JW, Fountaine CJ, Reece JD. Current state of commercial wearable technology in physical activity monitoring 2015-2017. Int J Exerc Sci. 2018;11(7):503–515.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다