PTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2018

The known-groups validity of intensity-based physical activity measurement using an accelerometer in people with subacute stroke.

Natsuki Shimizu, Hiroyuki Hashidate, Tomohiro Ota and 1 others

PMID 29706696

WHAT IT FOUND

In subacute stroke, an accelerometer estimated energy cost well during some movement tasks, but underestimated quiet lying, sitting and standing.

The device was adequate for active tasks. It was not adequate for still posture.

Key findings

01In people with subacute stroke, estimated METs for lying, sitting and standing were significantly lower than ACSM reference values, at 0.5, 0.8 and 1.1 METs.

02For sitting with reaching and standing with reaching tasks, estimated METs in people with subacute stroke did not differ significantly from ACSM reference values, at 1.6 and 1.7 METs.

03During walking, estimated METs were significantly lower in people with subacute stroke than in healthy controls, at 3.8 and 5.7 METs.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 10 stroke participants were studied, and all could walk independently with or without aids, so the results may not apply to people with more severe walking problems. The healthy control group was younger than the stroke group, so the comparison was not only stroke versus no stroke. The study tested only lying, sitting, standing, sitting with reaching, standing with reaching and walking, not other daily activities. The accelerometer underestimated METs during motionless posture, so it is not suitable for measuring intensity during quiet posture.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that this accelerometer can accurately measure physical activity intensity in all stroke patients. It underestimated quiet posture, and it was tested only in people who could walk independently.

Read it on PubMed →