Step Detection Accuracy and Energy Expenditure Estimation at Different Speeds by Three Accelerometers in a Controlled Environment in Overweight/Obese Subjects

Our aim was to compare three research-grade accelerometers for their accuracy in step detection and energy expenditure (EE) estimation in a laboratory setting, at different speeds, especially in overweight/obese participants. Forty-eight overweight/obese subjects participated. Participants performed an exercise routine on a treadmill with six different speeds (1.5, 3, 4.5, 6, 7.5, and 9 km/h) for 4 min each. The exercise was recorded on video and subjects wore three accelerometers during the exercise: Sartorio Xelometer (SX, hip), activPAL (AP, thigh), and ActiGraph GT3X (AG, hip), and energy expenditure (EE) was estimated using indirect calorimetry for comparisons. For step detection, speed-wise mean absolute percentage errors for the SX ranged between 9.73-2.26, 6.39-0.95 for the AP, and 88.69-2.63 for the AG. The activPALs step detection was the most accurate. For EE estimation, the ranges were 21.41-15.15 for the SX, 57.38-12.36 for the AP, and 59.45-28.92 for the AG. All EE estimation errors were due to underestimation. All three devices were accurate in detecting steps when speed exceeded 4 km/h and inaccurate in EE estimation regardless of speed. Our results will guide users to recognize the differences, weaknesses, and strengths of the accelerometer devices and their algorithms.