现代活动追踪器在监测慢性心脏病患者运动行为中的作用:卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析验证研究%A Herkert,Cyrille %A Kraal,Jos Johannes %A van Loon,Eline Maria Agnes %A van Hooff,Martijn %A Kemps,Hareld Marijn Clemens %+ Máxima医疗中心，Flow，慢性病预防、远程医疗和康复中心，Dominee Theodor Fliednerstraat 1, Eindhoven, 5631 BM, Netherlands, 31 408888200，cyrille.herkert@mmc.nl %K心脏疾病%K活动追踪器%K能量代谢%K体力活动%K验证研究%D 2019 %7 19.12.2019 %9原始论文%J JMIR Mhealth Uhealth %G英文%X背景:改善体力活动(PA)是二级预防和心脏(远程)康复的核心组成部分。市售活动追踪器常用于监测和促进心脏病患者的PA。然而，关于这些设备在心脏病患者中的有效性的研究很少。由于心脏病患者是根据这些设备测量的PA参数进行建议和治疗的，因此在这一特定人群中评估这些参数的准确性是非常重要的。目的:本研究的目的是确定Fitbit Charge 2 (FC2)和Mio Slice (MS)这两种腕戴式活动追踪器在评估心脏病患者能量消耗(EE)时的准确性和响应性。方法:通过活动追踪器评估的EE与间接量热法(Oxycon Mobile [OM])在实验室活动方案中进行比较。研究人员对两组患者进行了评估:稳定冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者左室射血分数(LVEF)保留和心力衰竭患者射血分数降低(HFrEF)。结果:共纳入38例患者，其中CAD 19例，HFrEF 19例(LVEF 31.8%， SD 7.6%)。 The CAD group showed no significant difference in total EE between FC2 and OM (47.5 kcal, SD 112 kcal; P=.09), in contrast to a significant difference between MS and OM (88 kcal, SD 108 kcal; P=.003). The HFrEF group showed significant differences in EE between FC2 and OM (38 kcal, SD 57 kcal; P=.01), as well as between MS and OM (106 kcal, SD 167 kcal; P=.02). Agreement of the activity trackers was low in both groups (CAD: intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] FC2=0.10, ICC MS=0.12; HFrEF: ICC FC2=0.42, ICC MS=0.11). The responsiveness of FC2 was poor, whereas MS was able to detect changes in cycling loads only. Conclusions: Both activity trackers demonstrated low accuracy in estimating EE in cardiac patients and poor performance to detect within-patient changes in the low-to-moderate exercise intensity domain. Although the use of activity trackers in cardiac patients is promising and could enhance daily exercise behavior, these findings highlight the need for population-specific devices and algorithms. %M 31855191 %R 10.2196/15045 %U http://mhealth.www.mybigtv.com/2019/12/e15045/ %U https://doi.org/10.2196/15045 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31855191

map