Key result
Resting seismocardiography accurately estimates VO2peak versus gold-standard exercise testing in overweight and obese patients.
Why the study?
The validity and applicability of non-exercise cardiorespiratory fitness estimation using resting seismocardiography had not been investigated in people with overweight and obesity undergoing a lifestyle intervention.
Does resting seismocardiography accurately estimate VO2peak and detect changes following a 14-week lifestyle intervention in people with overweight and obesity?
Observational (n=67)
No
Does resting seismocardiography accurately estimate VO2peak and detect changes following a 14-week lifestyle intervention in people with overweight and obesity?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Resting seismocardiography provides an accurate group-level estimation of VO2peak and can detect relative changes following a lifestyle intervention in individuals with overweight and obesity, though individual-level precision remains limited.
Purpose This study aimed to investigate the validity and applicability of a non-exercise estimation of cardiorespiratory fitness using resting seismocardiography (SCG eV̇O 2 peak) in people with overweight and obesity before and after a 14-week lifestyle intervention. Methods The study was carried out at a Folk high school that offers 14-week courses on lifestyle changes where participants live at the school and voluntarily participate in daily lectures and activities. Sixty-seven men and women with age and body mass index between 18 and 70 years and 25–50 kg·m –2 were tested at baseline, and 52 had a follow-up test after 14 weeks. Testing included the determination of anthropometric variables, an SCG eV̇O 2 peak at supine rest, and a gold standard V̇O 2 peak test on a cycle ergometer until voluntary exhaustion. Results Agreement analysis for V̇O 2 peak at baseline ( n = 67, SCG eV̇O 2 peak: 26.9 ± 1.9 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 , V̇O 2 peak: 26.6 ± 1.6 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 , mean ± 95% confidence interval) showed a bias of 0.3 ± 1.0 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) ranging ± 9.8 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 . A Pearson’s correlation of r = 0.78 ( p < 0.0001) and a standard error of estimate (SEE) of 5.0 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 were found between methods. At follow-up ( n = 52), body mass was reduced by 6.6 ± 1.4 kg ( p < 0.0001). V̇O 2 peak increased by 3.3 ± 0.9 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 and 175 ± 78 ml·min –1 and SCG eV̇O 2 peak by 2.6 ± 0.8 ml·min –1 ·kg –1 and 93 ± 76 ml·min –1 (two-way ANOVA repeated measure: intervention p < 0.0001, method p = 0.939 and interaction p = 0.125, relative V̇O 2 peak). A Pearson’s correlation of r = 0.37 ( p < 0.05) was found between changes in relative V̇O 2 peak but not for absolute V̇O 2 peak r = 0.10 ( p = 0.402). Conclusions The SCG method is accurate for estimating V̇O 2 peak and appropriate for detecting group changes in both relative and absolute V̇O 2 peak following a lifestyle intervention in people with overweight and obesity. Furthermore, the method can detect individual changes in V̇O 2 peak but not independently of body mass changes. Yet, the applicability is still limited by the relatively large variation in LoA and SEE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hansen et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Overweight and obesity (n=67). Seismocardiography (SCG) V̇O2peak estimation vs. Gold standard V̇O2peak test on a cycle ergometer was evaluated on Agreement between SCG estimated V̇O2peak and measured V̇O2peak at baseline (r = 0.78, p=<0.0001). Resting seismocardiography accurately estimated V̇O2peak with a bias of 0.3 ml·min–1·kg–1 (r=0.78) compared to gold-standard exercise testing in people with overweight and obesity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: