Currently, researchers can use the Actigraph 7164 or one of three different versions of the Actigraph GT1M to objectively measure physical activity. Purpose To determine if differences exist between activity counts from the Actigraph 7164 and the three versions of the GT1M at given walking and running speeds. Methods Ten male participants (23.6 ± 2.7 yrs) completed treadmill walking and running at ten different speeds (3-minute stages) while wearing either the Actigraph 7164 and the latest GT1M (GT1M-V3) or GT1M version one (GT1M-V1) and GT1M version two (GT1M-V2). Participants walked at 3, 5, and at 7 km˙hr−1 followed by running at 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 km˙hr−1. The accelerometers were worn on an elastic belt around the waist over the left and right hips. Testing was performed on different days using a counterbalanced within-subjects design to account for potential differences attributable to accelerometer placement. At each speed, a one-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to examine differences between activity counts in counts˙min−1(cpm). Post-hoc pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustments were used where appropriate. Results There were no significant differences between activity counts at any given walking or running speed (p<0.05). At all running speeds, activity counts from the Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V2 displayed the lowest and highest values, respectively. Output from all accelerometers peaked at 14 km˙hr−1 (mean range: 8974 ± 677 to 9412 ± 982 cpm) and then gradually declined at higher speeds. The mean difference score at peak output between the Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V2 was 439 ± 565 cpm. Conclusions There were no statistically significant differences between outputs from all the accelerometers indicating that researchers can select any of the four Actigraph accelerometers to do research.
Richman, ED, Tyo, BM, and Nicks, CR. Combined effects of self-myofascial release and dynamic stretching on range of motion, jump, sprint, and agility performance. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2018-Massage has been used as both a pre- and post-exercise modality with purported benefits to flexibility and athletic performance. This study was designed to determine the effect of a 6-minute protocol of self massage known as self-myofascial release (SMR) using a foam rolling device in conjunction with a general warm-up and sport-specific dynamic stretching (DS) session on flexibility and explosive athletic performance in a sample of 14 female collegiate athletes. After familiarization, participants completed 2 testing sessions that began with 5 minutes of jogging at a self-selected pace, followed by either a 6-minute foam rolling session (SMR) or 6 minutes of light walking (LW) and a subsequent 6-minute period of sport-specific DS. Sit-and-reach (SR) was measured after a general warm-up, the SMR, or LW session, and following DS, after which participants performed 3 trials each of squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), and drop jump (DJ). Two additional tests, the agility T-Test (TT) and a 10-yd short sprint (SP), were then performed. The change in SR after SMR was significantly greater than the change seen in SR after LW, although the total changes seen in each condition were not statistically different after the addition of DS. Squat jump and CMJ improved by 1.72 ± 2.47 cm and 2.63 ± 3.74 cm (p = 0.070, p = 0.070), with no significant change to DJ, SP, and TT. Self-myofascial release in the form of foam rolling after a general warm-up and preceding a DS session seems to improve SJ and CMJ with no detriment to flexibility, DJ, sprint, and agility performance in comparison with LW and DS.
Background:Activity monitors are widely used in research, and are currently being used to study physical activity (PA) trends in the US and Canada. The purpose of this study was to determine if body mass index (BMI) affects the step count accuracy of commonly used accelerometer-based activity monitors during treadmill walking.Methods:Participants were classified into BMI categories and instructed to walk on a treadmill at 3 different speeds (40, 67, and 94 m·min−1) while wearing 4 accelerometer-based activity monitors (ActiGraph GT1M, ActiCal, NL-2000, and StepWatch).Results:There was no significant main effect of BMI on pedometer accuracy. At the slowest speed, all waist-mounted devices significantly underestimated actual steps (P < .001), with the NL-2000 recording the greatest percentage (72%). At the intermediate speed, the ActiGraph was the least accurate, recording only 80% of actual steps. At the fastest speed, all of the activity monitors demonstrated a high level of accuracy.Conclusion:Our data suggest that BMI does not greatly affect the step-counting accuracy of accelerometer-based activity monitors. However, the accuracy of the ActiGraph, ActiCal, and NL-2000 decreases at slower speeds. The ankle-mounted StepWatch was the most accurate device across a wide range of walking speeds.
The Omron HJ-303, worn on the waist, appeared to be the most valid of the 3 pedometers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.