Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outcome Measures of Free-Living Activity in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation

  • Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation (C Sadowsky, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this article was to describe the utilization of body-worn activity monitors in the spinal cord injury (SCI) population and discuss the challenges of using body-worn sensors in rehabilitation research.

Recent Findings

Many activity monitor-based measures have been used and validated in the SCI population including stroke number, push frequency, upper limb activity counts, and wheelchair propulsion distance measured from a sensor attached to the wheelchair.

Summary

The ability to accurately measure physical activity in the free-living environment using body-worn sensors has the potential to enhance the understanding of barriers to adequate activity and identify possible effective interventions. As the use of activity monitors used in SCI rehabilitation research continues to grow, care must be taken to overcome challenges related to participant adherence and data quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Matthews CE, Ainsworth BE, Thompson RW, Bassett DR Jr. Sources of variance in daily physical activity levels as measured by an accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(8):1376–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ward DS, et al. Accelerometer use in physical activity: best practices and research recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11 Suppl):S582–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Masse LC, et al. Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11 Suppl):S544–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Warms CA, Belza BL. Actigraphy as a measure of physical activity for wheelchair users with spinal cord injury. Nurs Res. 2004;53(2):136–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Piercy KL, Troiano RP, Ballard RM, Carlson SA, Fulton JE, Galuska DA, et al. The physical activity guidelines for Americans. JAMA. 2018;320(19):2020–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ginis KAM, et al. Correction: Evidence-based scientific exercise guidelines for adults with spinal cord injury: an update and a new guideline. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(11):1114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dearwater SR, et al. Assessment of physical activity in inactive populations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1985;17(6):651–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brogioli, M., et al., Multi-day recordings of wearable sensors are valid and sensitive measures of function and independence in human spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma, 2016.

  9. Hiremath SV, Intille SS, Kelleher A, Cooper RA, Ding D. Estimation of energy expenditure for wheelchair users using a physical activity monitoring system. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(7):1146–1153 e1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ojeda M, Ding D. Temporal parameters estimation for wheelchair propulsion using wearable sensors. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:645284.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Sonenblum SE, Sprigle S, Lopez RA. Manual wheelchair use: bouts of mobility in everyday life. Rehabil Res Pract. 2012;2012:753165.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Sonenblum SE, et al. Validation of an accelerometer-based method to measure the use of manual wheelchairs. Med Eng Phys. 2012;34(6):781–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. • Tsang K, Hiremath SV, Crytzer TM, Dicianno BE, Ding D. Validity of activity monitors in wheelchair users: a systematic review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2016;53(6):641–58 This review analyzed the validity of sensors in detecting energy cost, user movement, and wheelchair movement of individuals in a wheelchair and found current methods/algorithms do not estimate energy expenditure for wheelchair users as well as commercial devices do for the able-bodied population.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bassey E, et al. Validation of a simple mechanical accelerometer (pedometer) for the estimation of walking activity. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1987;56(3):323–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. • Routhier F, et al. Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on manual wheelchair data loggers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98(7):1480–9 Fifty-seven researchers and 17 clinicians ranked “distance traveled” by manual wheelchair users as the most important outcome to understand from data loggers.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Salbach NM, O'Brien K, Brooks D, Irvin E, Martino R, Takhar P, et al. Speed and distance requirements for community ambulation: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95(1):117–128 e11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bassett JD, Cureton AL, Ainsworth BE. Measurement of daily walking distance-questionnaire versus pedometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(5):1018–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dobkin BH, et al. Reliability and validity of bilateral ankle accelerometer algorithms for activity recognition and walking speed after stroke. Stroke. 2011;42(8):2246–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Crouter SE, et al. Measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1455–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Aminian K, et al. Spatio-temporal parameters of gait measured by an ambulatory system using miniature gyroscopes. J Biomech. 2002;35(5):689–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Doheny EP, Foran TG, Greene BR. A single gyroscope method for spatial gait analysis. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2010;2010:1300–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fortune E, Lugade V, Morrow M, Kaufman K. Validity of using tri-axial accelerometers to measure human movement–part II: step counts at a wide range of gait velocities. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36(6):659–69.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Conwell LS, Trost SG, Spence L, Brown WJ, Batch JA. The feasibility of a home-based moderate-intensity physical activity intervention in obese children and adolescents. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44(4):250–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kenyon A, et al. Validity of pedometers in people with physical disabilities: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(6):1161–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hurd WJ, Morrow MM, Miller EJ, Adams RA, Sperling JW, Kaufman KR. Novel approaches to objectively assess shoulder function. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2014;23(10):e251–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. • McCracken LA, et al. Wrist accelerometry for physical activity measurement in individuals with spinal cord injury—a need for individually calibrated cut-points. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018;99(4):684–9 Twenty individuals with spinal cord injuries had varying moderate-to-vigorous physical activity points throughout a variety of activities suggesting the need for individualized cut-points in this population.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lugade V, et al. Validity of using tri-axial accelerometers to measure human movement - part I: posture and movement detection. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36(2):169–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Murphy SL, Kratz AL, Zynda AJ. Measuring physical activity in spinal cord injury using wrist-worn accelerometers. Am J Occup Ther. 2019;73(1):7301205090p1–7301205090p10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Kooijmans H, et al. Valid detection of self-propelled wheelchair driving with two accelerometers. Physiol Meas. 2014;35(11):2297.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Popp WL, et al. A novel algorithm for detecting active propulsion in wheelchair users following spinal cord injury. Med Eng Phys. 2016;38(3):267–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. • Albert MV, et al. In-lab versus at-home activity recognition in ambulatory subjects with incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 14(1):10 A machine learning model was created to detect lying, sitting, standing, walking, wheeling, and stair climbing in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injuries. Individualized machine learning models could be implemented to detect specific movements for individuals with varying levels of ability.

  32. Maijers M, et al. Is Fitbit Charge 2 a feasible instrument to monitor daily physical activity and handbike training in persons with spinal cord injury? A pilot study. Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2018;4(1):84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Adam Noah J, Spierer DK, Gu J, Bronner S. Comparison of steps and energy expenditure assessment in adults of Fitbit Tracker and Ultra to the Actical and indirect calorimetry. J Med Eng Technol. 2013;37(7):456–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Takacs J, et al. Validation of the Fitbit One activity monitor device during treadmill walking. J Sci Med Sport. 2014;17(5):496–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kressler J, et al. Accuracy and precision of consumer-level activity monitors for stroke detection during wheelchair propulsion and arm ergometry. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0191556.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Jayaraman C, et al. Variables influencing wearable sensor outcome estimates in individuals with stroke and incomplete spinal cord injury: a pilot investigation validating two research grade sensors. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018;15(1):19.

  37. Glasheen E, Domingo A, Moreno D, Kressler J. Validity of Apple Watch fitness tracker for wheelchair users. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98(12):e178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gill ML, et al. Neuromodulation of lumbosacral spinal networks enables independent stepping after complete paraplegia. Nat Med. 2018;24(11):1677–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This publication was made possible by funding from the National Institutes of Health (R01 HD84423-01).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Brianna M. Goodwin, Emma Fortune & Melissa M. B. Morrow

  2. Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Brianna M. Goodwin, Emma Fortune & Melissa M. B. Morrow

  3. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Meegan G. Van Straaten

Authors
  1. Brianna M. Goodwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emma Fortune
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Meegan G. Van Straaten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Melissa M. B. Morrow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa M. B. Morrow.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goodwin, B.M., Fortune, E., Van Straaten, M.G. et al. Outcome Measures of Free-Living Activity in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation. Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep 7, 284–289 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-019-00228-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-019-00228-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation