Abstract Title

Comparison of Wearable Devices in Assessing Leg Stiffness During Treadmill Running

Additional Funding Sources

The project described was supported by a student grant from the UI Office of Undergraduate Research.

Abstract

Many wearable devices have been validated in assessing temporospatial variables during running; however, it remains speculative as to the agreement of leg stiffness (Kleg) estimations with validated technology. Purpose: To assess the agreeability between two wearable devices in estimating Kleg during treadmill running. Research Question: Do two different wearable devices agree in estimating Kleg during a graded exercise test (GXT) on a treadmill? Methods: Seven endurance-trained male runners (28.5 ± 11.5 y; m 74.7 ± 7.1 kg; ht. 182.0 cm ± 6.4 cm; VO2max 57.5 ± 5.7 ml/kg/min) were recruited. Participants performed a GXT on two separate occasions. The first three stages of the GXT were used to assess Kleg, where participants ran at 3.13, 3.58, and 4.02 m/s and 1% incline. Data were sampled for 3 minutes during each stage via a Garmin Fenix 3 watch with a chest-mounted accelerometer (Garmin™ HRM-Run), and RunScribe™ pods mounted on the dorsum of each foot and the waistband above the sacrum. The agreeability of the wearables at each stage was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses. One-sample t-tests and linear regressions were used to assess systematic and proportional biases at each stage with α=0.05. Results: Overall, there was no significant difference in Kleg between the two devices (p = 0.969). Bland-Altman plots indicated no significant systematic bias (mean difference 0.014 kN/m, 95% CI [-0.70 to 0.73]). Conclusion: Given the lack of agreement between the two devices, more research needs to be done assessing Kleg using the RunScribe devices.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 

Comparison of Wearable Devices in Assessing Leg Stiffness During Treadmill Running

Many wearable devices have been validated in assessing temporospatial variables during running; however, it remains speculative as to the agreement of leg stiffness (Kleg) estimations with validated technology. Purpose: To assess the agreeability between two wearable devices in estimating Kleg during treadmill running. Research Question: Do two different wearable devices agree in estimating Kleg during a graded exercise test (GXT) on a treadmill? Methods: Seven endurance-trained male runners (28.5 ± 11.5 y; m 74.7 ± 7.1 kg; ht. 182.0 cm ± 6.4 cm; VO2max 57.5 ± 5.7 ml/kg/min) were recruited. Participants performed a GXT on two separate occasions. The first three stages of the GXT were used to assess Kleg, where participants ran at 3.13, 3.58, and 4.02 m/s and 1% incline. Data were sampled for 3 minutes during each stage via a Garmin Fenix 3 watch with a chest-mounted accelerometer (Garmin™ HRM-Run), and RunScribe™ pods mounted on the dorsum of each foot and the waistband above the sacrum. The agreeability of the wearables at each stage was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses. One-sample t-tests and linear regressions were used to assess systematic and proportional biases at each stage with α=0.05. Results: Overall, there was no significant difference in Kleg between the two devices (p = 0.969). Bland-Altman plots indicated no significant systematic bias (mean difference 0.014 kN/m, 95% CI [-0.70 to 0.73]). Conclusion: Given the lack of agreement between the two devices, more research needs to be done assessing Kleg using the RunScribe devices.