A review of the accuracy and utility of motion sensors to measure physical activity of frail older hospitalised patients.

The purpose of this review was to examine the utility and accuracy of commercially available motion sensors to measure step-count and time spent upright in frail older hospitalized patients. A database search (CINAHL and PubMed, 2004–2014) and a further hand search of papers’ references yielded 24 validation studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Fifteen motion sensors (eight pedometers, six accelerometers, and one sensor systems) have been tested in older adults. Only three have been tested in hospital patients, two of which detected postures and postural changes accurately, but none estimated step-count accurately. Only one motion sensor remained accurate at speeds typical of frail older hospitalized patients, but it has yet to be tested in this cohort. Time spent upright can be accurately measured in the hospital, but further validation studies are required to determine which, if any, motion sensor can accurately measure step-count.

Step-count accuracy of three motion sensors for older and frail medical inpatients

Objectives: To measure the step-count accuracy of an ankle-worn accelerometer, a thigh-worn accelerometer and one pedometer in older and frail inpatients. Design: Cross-sectional design study. Setting: Research room within a hospital. Participants: Convenience sample of inpatients aged ≥65 years, able to walk 20 metres unassisted, with or without a walking-aid. Intervention: Patients completed a 40-minute programme of predetermined tasks while wearing the three motion sensors simultaneously. Video-recording of the procedure provided the criterion measurement of step-count. Main Outcome Measures: Mean percentage (%) errors were calculated for all tasks, slow versus fast walkers, independent versus walking-aid-users, and over shorter versus longer distances. The Intra-class Correlation was calculated and accuracy was visually displayed by Bland-Altman plots. Results: Thirty-two patients (78.1 ±7.8 years) completed the study. Fifteen were female and 17 used walking-aids. Their median speed was 0.46 m/sec (interquartile range, IQR 0.36-0.66). The ankle-worn accelerometer overestimated steps (median 1% error, IQR -3 to 13). The other motion sensors underestimated steps (40% error (IQR -51 to -35) and 38% (IQR -93 to -27), respectively). The ankle-worn accelerometer proved more accurate over longer distances (3% error, IQR 0 to 9), than shorter distances (10%, IQR -23 to 9). Conclusions: The ankle-worn accelerometer gave the most accurate step-count measurement and was most accurate over longer distances. Neither of the other motion sensors had acceptable margins of error.