• norsk
    • English
  • English 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Universitetet i Stavanger
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Universitetet i Stavanger
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Using accelerometer to estimate energy expenditures with four equations in four training sessions

Dyrstad, Sindre Mikal; Hausken, Kjell
Journal article, Peer reviewed
Thumbnail
View/Open
Using_accelerometer.pdf (646.4Kb)
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/11250/223076
Date
2013
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Publikasjoner fra CRIStin [968]
  • Vitenskapelige publikasjoner (HF-IGIS) [81]
Original version
Dyrstad, S.M.; Hausken. K. (2013) Using accelerometer to estimate energy expenditures with four equations in four training sessions. International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, 25(2), pp. 91-101  
Abstract
This study compares estimated energy expenditure (EE) from four equations using accelerometer counts

in Zumba, interval 4x4 spinning, interval 4x4 running and pyramid running. The study also characterizes

differences in EE and accelerometer counts during activity and recovery periods for these activities.

Twenty six men and women (21.8±2.4 years) completed four training sessions. Vector magnitude counts

along three axes were measured using ActiGraph GT3X accelerometers. EE was estimated using four

equations. Results show that EE varied by 34.2%, 19.7%, 18.0% and 20.0% depending on which equation

was used in Zumba, 4x4 running, 4x4 spinning and pyramid running, respectively (p<0.001). Compared

with 4x4 running, Zumba had 22.0% lower EE and 4x4 spinning had 47.8% lower EE in kcal/min

(p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in EE between 4x4 running and pyramid running. The

mean VM/min (vector magnitude counts per min) for Zumba was 22.1% and 20.4% lower than for 4x4

running and pyramid running, respectively (p<0.0001). An 85.3% higher VM/min was found in 4x4

running compared to 4x4 spinning (p<0.0001). The various equations caused substantial differences in the

estimation of EE, particularly in Zumba, which is explained. Interval running provided the highest EE and

counts/min. When 4x4 spinning was carried out both in sitting and standing positions, the underestimation

in EE from accelerometer was about 50% compared with 4x4 running.
Journal
International Journal of Sports Science

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit
 

 

Browse

ArchiveCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit