Estimate of Swimming Energy Expenditure Utilizing an Omnidirectional Accelerometer and Swim...
1
Estimate of Swimming Energy Expenditure Utilizing an Omnidirectional Accelerometer and Swim Performance Measures Jeanne D. Johnston and Joel M. Stager, FACSM Counsilman Center for the Science of Swimming Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION PURPOSE PURPOSE Examine the relationship between accelerometer output and the determinants of swim velocity as a means to evaluate the efficacy of an omnidirectional accelerometer (ODA) to quantify swimming energy expenditure (SWE). The relationship between accelerometer counts and energy expenditure while swimming may be non-linear due to the relationship among swim efficiency, swim velocity, and the resistive forces. M ETHODS ETHODS Age, height, and weight were recorded for each subject. Eight men (26.5 years, +/-8.8) and 10 women (27.1 years, +/-9.8) performed three submaximal, constant paced, 365.76 meter (400 yard) front crawl swims. Subjects were instructed to maintain a constant paced swim at ‘light, moderate and hard’ intensities of their choosing. Swimming velocities ranged from .82- 1.51 m·sec- 1 . Each subject completed one swim at a common velocity of 1 m·sec -1 . Subjects were pace by a visual and audio cue. An ODA (Mini-Mitter Corporation, Actical accelerometer) was worn on the right wrist, waist, and leg. Accelerometer counts and heart rate were recorded for each 15-second period and averaged over one minute. Expired gases were collected for 20 seconds at the completion of each swim to determine oxygen consumption (Costill, et al., 1985). Multiple regression techniques were utilized to develop equations to estimate SWE (kcalkg -1 min -1 ) based on accelerometer counts, swim performance traits, and subject characteristics. Significance was set at p = 0.05 DISCUSSION ISCUSSION CONCLUSION ONCLUSION Valid estimates of SWE can be obtained through a combination of variables including ODA accelerometer counts, swim velocity, and subject characteristics. The amount of variance accounted for with these variables (R 2 values) is similar to algorithms generated for land-based activities. Supported, in part, by United States Master Swimming. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CKNOWLEDGEMENT RESULTS ESULTS ABSTRACT ABSTRACT Energy expenditure, as it relates to velocity of movement, differs in swimming when compared to land based activities. Investigations examining land based activities have demonstrated a linear relationship between accelerometer counts and energy expenditure thus allowing their use in determining energy balance. Due to the complex relationship among swim efficiency, swim velocity and drag, it is likely that a non-linear relationship will exist among them while swimming. Purpose: Examine the relationship between accelerometer output and the determinants of swim velocity as a means to evaluate the efficacy of an Omnidirectional accelerometer (ODA) to quantify swimming energy expenditure (SWE). Methods: Eight men (26.5 years, +/-8.8) and 10 women (27.1 years, +/-9.8) performed three submaximal 365.76 meter (400 yard) front crawl swims. Expired gases were collected for 20 seconds at the completion of each swim to determine oxygen consumption. An ODA was worn on the right wrist, waist, and right leg. Multiple regression techniques were utilized to develop prediction equations for SWE (kcalkg-1min-1) based on accelerometer counts, swim performance traits, and subject characteristics. Results: Significant correlations between measured VO 2 and ODA output were noted for men (leg, r = 0.82, p< 0.01; waist, r = 0.48, p< 0.05) and women (arm, r = 0.74, p< 0.01; leg, r = 0.42, p < 0.05). Age and height were included in the prediction equation for both men and women. The best linear prediction equations included leg counts for the men (R 2 = 0.72, SEE = .0333 kcalkg -1 min -1 ) and wrist counts for the women (R 2 = 0.62, SEE = .0432 kcalkg -1 min -1 ). The equation for the males was significantly improved (p<0.05) with the addition of second monitor (waist) expressed as a non-linear component (waist + waist 2 ; R 2 =.80, SEE = .0300 kcalkg - 1 min -1 ). The equation for the females was significantly improved by replacing the wrist value with a squared wrist value and adding the swim velocity (R 2 =.65, SEE = .0429 kcalkg -1 min -1 ). The best overall equation for the women was obtained when leg counts and heart rate were added to this equation (R 2 =.72, SEE = .0392 kcalkg -1 min -1 ). Conclusion: Valid estimates of SWE can be obtained through a combination of variables including ODA accelerometer counts, swim velocity, and subject characteristics. The amount of variance accounted for with these variables (R 2 values) is similar to algorithms generated for land-based activities. Energy expenditure, as it relates to velocity of movement, differs in swimming when compared to land based activities. Investigations examining land based activities have demonstrated a linear relationship between accelerometer counts and energy expenditure thus allowing their use in determining energy balance. Due to the complex relationship among swim efficiency, swim velocity and drag, it is likely that a non-linear relationship will exist among them while swimming. H YPOTHESES YPOTHESES Sex Age (years) Height (cm) Weight (kg) Male 26.5 +/-8.8 181.8 +/-3.9 84.9 +/-9.7 Female 27.1 +/-9.8 168.8 +/-6.0 67.2 +/-10.1 Table 1. Subject characteristics Sex Arm Leg Waist Male .345 .820** .481* Female .741** .421* .231 Correlation Significant at .01**, .05* (2-tailed) Table 2. Correlation coefficients between measured SWE and ODA counts Significant differences were observed for height (p < 0.05), weight (p < 0.01), swimming velocity (p < 0.05) and SWE (p < 0.05) when comparing sexes. Model Predictors R 2 SEE Model 1 Males Leg 0.72 0.03 3 Model 2 Males Leg + Waist + Waist 2 0.80 0.03 0 Model 1 Females Arm 0.62 0.04 3 Model 2 Females Arm 2 + Velocity 0.65 0.04 3 Model 3 Females Arm 2 + Velocity+ Leg + HR 0.72 0.03 9 Table 3. Model Comparisons for Males and Females The relationship between accelerometer output and energy expenditure varies with the sex of the subject and accelerometer placement. The relationship between accelerometer output and swim velocity appears to be non- linear within the male population. Differences in accelerometer counts at a given velocity may reflect differences in skill and/or economy across a restricted range of velocities. The relationship between accelerometer output and energy expenditure appears to be linear in nature; however, consideration of non-linear components significantly improved the estimation of energy expended while swimming. The inclusion of multiple monitors significantly improved the estimates of SWE. The addition of swim performance characteristics (swim velocity) significantly improved the estimates of SWE. Females:M etabolic CostVersus Swim Velocity y = 0.3618x -0.2387 R 2 = 0.2154 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Velocity (m /sec) Metabolic Cost (kcal/kg/min) M ales:M etabolic CostVersus Swim Velcoity y = 0.5999x 2 -1.1715x + 0.7252 R 2 = 0.4893 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 Velocity (m /sec) Metabolic Cost (kcal/kg/min) Figures 1-2. The relationship between energy expenditure and swim velocity was not the same for both sexes. Figures 3-4. There was a weak (R 2 = 0.26) relationship between arm counts and swim velocity and a strong linear relationship with energy expenditure (R = 0.55) M ales:Accelerom terLeg Counts and Swim Velocity y = 44044x 2 -92075x + 53810 R 2 = 0.6098 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 Velocity (m /sec) Leg Counts/Min Figures 4-5. There was a strong non-linear relationship (R 2 = 0.61) between leg counts and swim velocity, and a linear relationship between energy expenditure (R 2 = 0.67). Males:AcceleromterWaistCounts and Swim Velocity y = 8905.8x 2 -20809x + 14424 R 2 = 0.6735 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 Velocity (m /sec) Acceleromter Counts/Min Age and height were included in the prediction equation for both men and women There is no indication of bias towards under or overestimation across the range of measured values for either the males or females. Measured and predicted values for energy expenditure via the models were not significantly different ( p < 0.05). Figures 6-7. There was a strong (R 2 = 0.67) non- linear relationship between waist counts and swim velocity for males. Significant correlations between measured VO 2 and ODA output were noted for men (leg, r = 0.82, p< 0.01; waist, r = 0.48, p< 0.05) and women (arm, r = 0.74, p< 0.01; leg, r = 0.42, p < 0.05). Females:AcceleromterArm Counts and Swim Velocity y = 4507.1x + 978.75 R 2 = 0.2597 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Velocity (m /sec) Acceleromter Counts/Minute Females: AcceleromterArm Counts Versus M etabolic Cost y = 8411.1x + 4529.7 R 2 = 0.5495 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 M etabolic Cost(kcal/kg/m in) Acceleromter Counts/Min M ales:AcceleromterLeg Counts and M etabolic Cost y = 40248x -233.33 R 2 = 0.6742 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 Metabolic Cost(kcal/kg/m in) Acceleromter Counts/Min Males:AcceleromterWaistCounts and M etabolic Cost y = 3272.5x + 1909.6 R 2 = 0.2318 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 Metabolic Cost(kcal/kg/m in) Acceleromter Counts/Min
-
Upload
felix-rose -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of Estimate of Swimming Energy Expenditure Utilizing an Omnidirectional Accelerometer and Swim...
Estimate of Swimming Energy Expenditure Utilizing an Omnidirectional Accelerometer and Swim Performance
MeasuresJeanne D. Johnston and Joel M. Stager, FACSMCounsilman Center for the Science of Swimming
Human Performance Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
INTRODUCTIOINTRODUCTIONN
PURPOSEPURPOSE
Examine the relationship between accelerometer output and the determinants of swim velocity as a means to evaluate the efficacy of an omnidirectional accelerometer (ODA) to quantify swimming energy expenditure (SWE).
The relationship between accelerometer counts and energy expenditure while swimming may be non-linear due to the relationship among swim efficiency, swim velocity, and the resistive forces.
MMETHODSETHODS
Age, height, and weight were recorded for each subject. Eight men (26.5 years, +/-8.8) and 10 women (27.1 years, +/-9.8)
performed three submaximal, constant paced, 365.76 meter (400 yard) front crawl swims.
Subjects were instructed to maintain a constant paced swim at ‘light, moderate and hard’ intensities of their choosing. Swimming velocities ranged from .82-1.51 m·sec-1.
Each subject completed one swim at a common velocity of 1 m·sec-1. Subjects were pace by a visual and audio cue.
An ODA (Mini-Mitter Corporation, Actical accelerometer) was worn on the right wrist, waist, and leg. Accelerometer counts and heart rate were recorded for each 15-second period and averaged over one minute.
Expired gases were collected for 20 seconds at the completion of each swim to determine oxygen consumption (Costill, et al., 1985).
Multiple regression techniques were utilized to develop equations to estimate SWE (kcalkg-1min-1) based on accelerometer counts, swim performance traits, and subject characteristics.
Significance was set at p = 0.05
DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
CCONCLUSIONONCLUSION
Valid estimates of SWE can be obtained through a combination of variables including ODA accelerometer counts, swim velocity, and subject characteristics. The amount of variance accounted for with these variables (R2 values) is similar to algorithms generated for land-based activities.
Supported, in part, by United States Master Swimming.
AACKNOWLEDGEMENCKNOWLEDGEMENTT
RRESULTSESULTS
ABSTRACTABSTRACT
Energy expenditure, as it relates to velocity of movement, differs in swimming when compared to land based activities. Investigations examining land based activities have demonstrated a linear relationship between accelerometer counts and energy expenditure thus allowing their use in determining energy balance. Due to the complex relationship among swim efficiency, swim velocity and drag, it is likely that a non-linear relationship will exist among them while swimming. Purpose: Examine the relationship between accelerometer output and the determinants of swim velocity as a means to evaluate the efficacy of an Omnidirectional accelerometer (ODA) to quantify swimming energy expenditure (SWE). Methods: Eight men (26.5 years, +/-8.8) and 10 women (27.1 years, +/-9.8) performed three submaximal 365.76 meter (400 yard) front crawl swims. Expired gases were collected for 20 seconds at the completion of each swim to determine oxygen consumption. An ODA was worn on the right wrist, waist, and right leg. Multiple regression techniques were utilized to develop prediction equations for SWE (kcalkg-1min-1) based on accelerometer counts, swim performance traits, and subject characteristics. Results: Significant correlations between measured VO2 and ODA output were noted for men (leg, r = 0.82, p< 0.01; waist, r = 0.48, p< 0.05) and women (arm, r = 0.74, p< 0.01; leg, r = 0.42, p < 0.05). Age and height were included in the prediction equation for both men and women. The best linear prediction equations included leg counts for the men (R2 = 0.72, SEE = .0333 kcalkg-1min-1) and wrist counts for the women (R2= 0.62, SEE = .0432 kcalkg-1min-1). The equation for the males was significantly improved (p<0.05) with the addition of second monitor (waist) expressed as a non-linear component (waist + waist2; R2=.80, SEE = .0300 kcalkg-1min-1). The equation for the females was significantly improved by replacing the wrist value with a squared wrist value and adding the swim velocity (R2=.65, SEE = .0429 kcalkg-1min-
1). The best overall equation for the women was obtained when leg counts and heart rate were added to this equation (R2=.72, SEE = .0392 kcalkg-1min-1). Conclusion: Valid estimates of SWE can be obtained through a combination of variables including ODA accelerometer counts, swim velocity, and subject characteristics. The amount of variance accounted for with these variables (R2 values) is similar to algorithms generated for land-based activities.
Energy expenditure, as it relates to velocity of movement, differs in swimming when compared to land based activities. Investigations examining land based activities have demonstrated a linear relationship between accelerometer counts and energy expenditure thus allowing their use in determining energy balance. Due to the complex relationship among swim efficiency, swim velocity and drag, it is likely that a non-linear relationship will exist among them while swimming.
HHYPOTHESESYPOTHESES
Sex Age (years) Height (cm) Weight (kg)
Male 26.5 +/-8.8 181.8 +/-3.9 84.9 +/-9.7
Female 27.1 +/-9.8 168.8 +/-6.0 67.2 +/-10.1
Table 1. Subject characteristics
Sex Arm Leg Waist
Male .345 .820** .481*
Female .741** .421* .231
Correlation Significant at .01**, .05* (2-tailed)Table 2. Correlation coefficients between measured SWE and ODA counts
Significant differences were observed for height (p < 0.05), weight (p < 0.01), swimming velocity (p < 0.05) and SWE (p < 0.05) when comparing sexes.
Model Predictors R2 SEE
Model 1 Males Leg 0.72 0.033
Model 2 Males Leg + Waist + Waist2 0.80 0.030
Model 1 Females Arm 0.62 0.043
Model 2 Females Arm2 + Velocity 0.65 0.043
Model 3 Females Arm2 + Velocity+ Leg + HR 0.72 0.039
Table 3. Model Comparisons for Males and Females
The relationship between accelerometer output and energy expenditure varies with the sex of the subject and accelerometer placement.
The relationship between accelerometer output and swim velocity appears to be non-linear within the male population.
Differences in accelerometer counts at a given velocity may reflect differences in skill and/or economy across a restricted range of velocities.
The relationship between accelerometer output and energy expenditure appears to be linear in nature; however, consideration of non-linear components significantly improved the estimation of energy expended while swimming.
The inclusion of multiple monitors significantly improved the estimates of SWE.
The addition of swim performance characteristics (swim velocity) significantly improved the estimates of SWE.
Females: Metabolic Cost Versus Swim Velocity
y = 0.3618x - 0.2387
R2 = 0.21540
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Velocity (m/sec)
Metab
olic C
ost
(kcal/
kg/m
in)
Males: Metabolic Cost Versus Swim Velcoity
y = 0.5999x2 - 1.1715x + 0.7252
R2 = 0.48930
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7
Velocity (m/sec)
Metab
olic C
ost
(kcal/
kg/m
in)
Figures 1-2. The relationship between energy expenditure and swim velocity was not the same for both sexes.
Figures 3-4. There was a weak (R2 = 0.26) relationship between arm counts and swim velocity and a strong linear relationship with energy expenditure (R2 = 0.55)
Males: Acceleromter Leg Counts and Swim Velocity
y = 44044x2 - 92075x + 53810
R2 = 0.60980
5000
10000
15000
20000
0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7
Velocity (m/sec)
Leg C
ounts
/Min
Figures 4-5. There was a strong non-linear relationship (R2 = 0.61) between leg counts and swim velocity, and a linear relationship between energy expenditure (R2 = 0.67).
Males: Acceleromter Waist Countsand Swim Velocity
y = 8905.8x2 - 20809x + 14424
R2 = 0.67350
1000
2000
3000
4000
0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7
Velocity (m/sec)
Acce
lerom
ter
Coun
ts/Mi
n
Age and height were included in the prediction equation for both men and women There is no indication of bias towards under or overestimation across the range of measured values for either the males or females.Measured and predicted values for energy expenditure via the models were not significantly different ( p < 0.05).
Figures 6-7. There was a strong (R2 = 0.67) non-linear relationship between waist counts and swim velocity for males.
Significant correlations between measured VO2 and ODA output were noted for men (leg, r = 0.82, p< 0.01; waist, r = 0.48, p< 0.05) and women (arm, r = 0.74, p< 0.01; leg, r = 0.42, p < 0.05).
Females: Acceleromter Arm Counts and Swim Velocity
y = 4507.1x + 978.75
R2 = 0.25973000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Velocity (m/sec)
Acce
lerom
ter
Coun
ts/Mi
nute
Females: Acceleromter Arm Counts Versus Metabolic Cost
y = 8411.1x + 4529.7
R2 = 0.54953000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Metabolic Cost (kcal/kg/min)
Accel
eromt
er Co
unts/
Min
Males: Acceleromter Leg Counts and Metabolic Cost
y = 40248x - 233.33
R2 = 0.67420
5000
10000
15000
20000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Metabolic Cost (kcal/kg/min)
Accel
eromt
er Co
unts/
Min
Males: Acceleromter Waist Counts and Metabolic Cost
y = 3272.5x + 1909.6
R2 = 0.2318
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Metabolic Cost (kcal/kg/min)
Acce
lerom
ter
Coun
ts/Mi
n
