A Comparison of a Novel Stretchable Smart Patch for Measuring Runner’s Step Rates with Existing Measuring Technologies

Abstract

A novel wearable smart patch can monitor various aspects of physical activity, including the dynamics of running, but like any new device developed for such applications, it must first be tested for validity. Here, we compare the step rate while running in place as measured by this smart patch to the corresponding values obtained utilizing ‘‘gold standard’’ MEMS accelerometers in combination with bilateral force plates equipped with HBM load cells, as well as the values provided by a three-dimensional motion capture system and the Garmin Dynamics Running Pod. The 15 healthy, physically active volunteers (age = 23 ± 3 years; body mass = 74 ± 17 kg, height = 176 ± 10 cm) completed three consecutive 20-s bouts of running in place, starting at low, followed by medium, and finally at high intensity, all self-chosen. Our major findings are that the rates of running in place provided by all four systems were valid, with the notable exception of the fast step rate as measured by the Garmin Running Pod. The lowest mean bias and LoA for these measurements at all rates were associated consistently with the smart patch.

The Validity of a Three-Dimensional Motion Capture System and the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod in Connection with an Assessment of Ground Contact Time While Running in Place

“…Although the values provided by the MoCap were much closer to those obtained with the gold standard than those provided by the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod, a reliable algorithm for use during running in place remains to be developed. At the same time, two of the other five parameters assessed by the Garmin Running Dynamics Pod might still be suitable for analysing running in place, and, indeed, a measurement of cadence by this device in this context has recently been validated [ 51 ].…”

Assessing Trail Running Biomechanics: A Comparative Analysis of the Reliability of StrydTM and GARMINRP Wearable Devices

“…The data capture frequency was 1 Hz for both devices (Stryd TM and GARMIN RP ), a sampling frequency similar to that used in similar studies on running biomechanics [ 7 , 8 , 16 ]. Following data recording, the data were exported for subsequent analyses.…”

“…It is necessary to objectively assess biomechanical parameters under ecological conditions to quantify the training load and performance [ 6 ]. The availability and popularity of wearable sports technology for running has grown extensively in recent years [ 8 ]. In this context, recent advances in wearable technology have accelerated the development of less obtrusive and more precise and affordable devices designed to monitor a wide range of parameters in trail runners exercising in their normal environments [ 8 ].…”

“…The availability and popularity of wearable sports technology for running has grown extensively in recent years [ 8 ]. In this context, recent advances in wearable technology have accelerated the development of less obtrusive and more precise and affordable devices designed to monitor a wide range of parameters in trail runners exercising in their normal environments [ 8 ]. Recently, there has been an effort to produce low-cost, portable gait and running analysis equipment.…”

“…On the other hand, there are devices from the GARMIN RP brand. Apart from measuring heart rate and estimating energy expenditure, these devices provide data on distance, speed, and elevation [ 14 ], vertical oscillation [ 15 ], contact time [ 16 ], and cadence [ 8 ]. While these kinds of devices have been extensively studied in laboratory settings using treadmills for testing, there is a notable dearth of research in real-world scenarios, conducting tests under natural conditions.…”