Concurrent validity and reliability of an activity monitoring for rehabilitation (AMoR) platform for step counting and sitting/lying time in post-stroke individuals

ABSTRACT

Background

Objective and reliable measurements to investigate daily behavior patterns in people with stroke could help therapeutic interventions after a stroke.

Objective

To evaluate whether the Activity Monitoring for Rehabilitation (AMoR) platform has adequate concurrent validity and reliability for step counting and time spent sitting/lying in people post-stroke and to investigate its percentage accuracy for step counting at different walking speeds.

Methods

Cross-sectional observational study. Fifty chronic post-stroke subjects used the AMoR platform and SAM simultaneously while a Video camera recorded the same activities during clinical trials. Spearman’s correlation coefficient, the mean absolute percentage error, the intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plot analyses were used to estimate the validity and reliability of the AMoR platform and StepWatch^TM Activity Monitor (SAM). The accuracy percentage was calculated for each device and plotted as a function of the walking speed during the 10-meter walk test (10MWT).

Results

There was a very high correlation for step counting in all tests and a high correlation for time spent sitting/lying. The mean absolute percentage error values remained below 4% for step counting and time sitting/lying. The AMoR platform also showed excellent reliability for step counting and sitting/lying time, with values within the limit of agreement in the Bland-Altman plots. A high percentage of accuracy for step counting in the AMoR platform was observed during the 10MWT.

Conclusion

The AMoR platform is valid and reliable for step counting and time spent sitting/lying, with a high percentage of accuracy at different walking speeds in the post-stroke population.

KEYWORDS:

• Sedentarism
• rehabilitation
• cerebrovascular diseases
• wearable technologies
• accelerometry

Authors’ Contributions

Concept/idea/research design: S.G. Oliveira, S.L. Nogueira, L. Carnaz, C.C. Alcantara, T.L. Russo.

Writing: S.G. Oliveira; S.L. Nogueira, T.L. Russo.

Data collection: S.G. Oliveira, J.A.M. Ribeiro, V.R.R. Urruchia.

Data analysis: S.G. Oliveira, V.R.R. Urruchia, L. Carnaz.

Consultation (including review of manuscript before submitting): S.G. Oliveira, S.L. Nogueira, J.A.M. Ribeiro, L. Carnaz, C.C. Alcantara, T.L. Russo.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethics Approval

This study was approved by the Ethics and Research Committee at the Federal University of Sao Carlos, Brazil (Certificate of Presentation for Ethical Appreciation [CAAE] 79,224,117.6.0000.5504). All patients provided informed consent before participating in this study.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed on the publisher’s website.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by the Brazilian Government Funding Agencies: Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES; Finance Code 001), the Sao Paulo Research Foundation - FAPESP (fundings: 2013/25805-1, 2017/13655-6 and 2019/25569-2) and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - CNPq (funding: 442972/2014-8).