Key result
Fitbit-Flex was significantly correlated with Actigraph for step counts (r=0.95) but over-estimated steps by 1038 per day and MVPA by 10 minutes per day.
Why the study?
Does the Fitbit-Flex accurately measure daily step counts and MVPA compared to the Actigraph accelerometer in a cardiac rehabilitation population?
Population
48 cardiac patients and family members participating in community-based exercise programs, mean age 65.6 ±…
Comparison
Fitbit-Flex activity monitor worn over four days vs Actigraph accelerometer worn simultaneously
Design
Cross-sectional
Follow-up
4 days
Authors
Loading...
Overestimation by Fitbit-Flex warrants caution for precise activity tracking in cardiac rehab; leaves open need for device calibration studies.
Observational (n=48)
Does the Fitbit-Flex accurately measure daily step counts and MVPA compared to the Actigraph accelerometer in a cardiac rehabilitation population?
Effect estimate: r = 0.95 for step counts; r = 0.74 for MVPA
Fitbit-Flex is a valid tool for assessing attainment of physical activity guidelines in cardiac rehabilitation patients, despite slight overestimation of steps and MVPA.
Alharbi et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Cardiac rehabilitation (n=48). Fitbit-Flex vs. Actigraph accelerometer was evaluated on Daily step counts and minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) (r = 0.95 for step counts; r = 0.74 for MVPA). Fitbit-Flex was significantly correlated with Actigraph for step counts (r=0.95) but over-estimated steps by 1038 per day and MVPA by 10 minutes per day.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: