Key result
Seismocardiography correlates moderately with CPET but overestimates VO2-peak by ~3.9 ml/kg/min in healthy older adults.
Why the study?
CPET is difficult to conduct in older adults and alternative methods offer low to moderate accuracy, prompting evaluation of resting seismocardiography for estimating VO2-peak.
Does seismocardiography accurately estimate V̇O₂-peak compared to cardiopulmonary exercise testing in healthy older adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=36)
No
Does seismocardiography accurately estimate V̇O₂-peak compared to cardiopulmonary exercise testing in healthy older adults?
Seismocardiography shows a moderate-to-strong correlation with CPET for estimating V̇O₂-peak in older adults but systematically overestimates it, requiring further methodological refinement.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports preliminary validation; leaves open clinical accuracy and adoption in older adults.
Introduction Cardiorespiratory fitness predicts health and longevity. The gold-standard test for V̇O₂-peak, the cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET), is difficult to conduct in older adults, and alternative methods offer low to moderate accuracy. This project compared a new method, seismocardiography, to CPET in older adults. It was hypothesized that seismographic V̇O₂-peak estimates would strongly correlate with CPET-derived V̇O₂-peak. Method: Thirty-six healthy older adults (aged 65–75 years; 19 female) completed the seismocardiography assessment (Seismofit ® ) of resting V̇O₂-peak and a CPET on a cycle ergometer. Two criteria were used to support the attainment of maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O₂-peak) during the ramp exercise test: (1) a V̇O₂ plateau, defined as an increase in oxygen uptake of less than 150 mL·min⁻¹ despite a further increase in work rate during the final phase of the incremental protocol, and (2) a respiratory exchange ratio (RER) > 1.15. The V̇O₂-peak estimation at rest was performed over 40 s with participants lying supine while wearing a Seismofit ® chest sensor (VentriJect, Hellerup, Denmark). Concordance between measurements was assessed using correlations and Bland-Altman plots, and paired t-test evaluated mean differences between Seismofit and CPET-derived V̇O₂-peak. Results The sample had a mean age of 70 ± 3.0 years and BMI of 25.7 ± 2.8 kg/m². For all participants, a significant positive correlation was observed between Seismofit ® and measured V̇O₂-peak ( r = 0.57, p < 0.001). When restricting the analysis to the 27 participants with validated V̇O₂-peak, a strong significant positive association between the methods was found ( r = 0.80, p < 0.001). For all participants, Seismofit significantly overestimated V̇O₂-peak (t = 4.48, df = 35, p < 0.001). Conclusion This study demonstrated that Seismofit show a moderate-to-strong association with CPET measurements in older adults. Seismofit, however, systematically overestimated V̇O₂-peak. For Seismofit to be integrated into large-scale cohort studies and experimental research, the methodology used for older adults needs further development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sundberg et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Healthy older adults (n=36). Seismocardiography (Seismofit) vs. Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) was evaluated on V̇O₂-peak estimation (MD 3.87 ml/kg/min, 95% CI 2.11-5.62, p=<0.001). Seismocardiography showed a moderate positive correlation with CPET (r = 0.57) but systematically overestimated VO2-peak by a mean difference of 3.87 ml/kg/min in healthy older adults.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: