Why the study?
Does an accelerometer compared to a pedometer better correlate with ventilatory threshold in coronary artery disease patients undergoing phase III cardiac rehabilitation?
RCT (n=9)
Open-label
Random
No
Does an accelerometer compared to a pedometer better correlate with ventilatory threshold in coronary artery disease patients undergoing phase III cardiac rehabilitation?
In cardiac telerehabilitation, accelerometer measurements correlate better with submaximal exercise capacity than pedometers, though patients found the pedometer easier to use.
Accelerometers may be preferred over pedometers for monitoring submaximal capacity in cardiac telerehabilitation; extends wearable validation in phase III CAD rehab.
We compared the activity estimated by a pedometer and an accelerometer in coronary artery disease patients included in a phase III cardiac rehabilitation programme. Nine patients were divided into two groups and wore the pedometer for four weeks, and then subsequently the accelerometer for four weeks, or vice versa. The recorded daily exercise level (total daily steps and calories burned) was measured for each patient and compared with oxygen uptake and ventilatory threshold measured by ergospirometry at the end of the study. There was a significant correlation between the calories measured by the accelerometer and the ventilatory threshold (i.e. the sub-maximal capacity), r = 0.75 (P = 0.05). There was a significant correlation between the measured steps on the accelerometer and the ventilatory threshold, r = 0.72 (P = 0.07). There were no significant correlations for the pedometer. A questionnaire concerning ease of use of the sensors indicated that the cardiac patients favoured the pedometer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Frederix et al. (2011) conducted an RCT in Coronary artery disease (phase III cardiac rehabilitation) (n=9). Accelerometer (POLAR FA20) vs. Pedometer (OMRON 720IT) was evaluated on Correlation of daily calories burned with ventilatory threshold (r=0.75, p=0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: