Step activity monitor: Long-term, continuous recording of ambulatory function

Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 8-18

  Coleman, Kim L ^a   Smith, Douglas G ^b   Boone, David A ^b   Joseph, Aaron W ^b   Del Aguila, Michael A ^b  

^a Prosthetics Research Study   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Activity; Ambulation; Functional evaluation; Gait; Monitor; Outcomes assessment; Step count

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; GAIT ANALYSIS; PATIENT MONITORING; RECORDING INSTRUMENTS;

STEP ACTIVITY MONITOR (SAM);

HUMAN REHABILITATION EQUIPMENT;

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; GAIT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; AMPUTATION; ANIMALS; CHILD; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; GAIT; HEART FAILURE, CONGESTIVE; HUMANS; MALE; MICROCOMPUTERS; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, AMBULATORY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0032601393     PISSN: 07487711     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Reuben DB, Valle LA, Hays RD, Siu AL. Measuring physical function in community-dwelling older persons: a comparison of self-administered, interviewer-administered, and performance-based measures. J Am Geriatr Soc 1995;3:17-23.
2. Elam JT, Graney MJ, Beaver T, El Derwi D, Applegate WB, Miller ST. Comparison of subjective ratings of function with observed functional ability of frail older persons. Am J Public Health 1991;81(9):1127-30.
3. Sager MA, Dunham MC, Schwantes A, Mecum L, Halverson K, Harlowe D. Measurement of activities of daily living in hospitalized elderly: a comparison of self-report and performance based methods. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992;40(5):457-62.
4. Dorevitch MI, Cossar RM, Bailey FJ, et al. The accuracy of self and informant ratings of physical functional capacity in the elderly. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;5(7):791-8.
5. Sequeira MM, Rickenbach M, Wietlisbach M, Tullen B, Schutz Y. Physical activity assessment using a pedometer and its comparison with a questionnaire in a large population study. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142(9):989-99.
6. Halstead LS. Longitudinal unobtrusive measurements in rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1976;57:189-93.
7. Holden JM, Fernie GR. Extent of artificial limb use following rehabilitation. J Orthop Res 1987;5:562-8.
8. Holden J, Fernie GR, Soto M. An assessment of a system to monitor the activity of patients in a rehabilitation program. Prosthet Orthot Int 1979;99-102.
9. Klesges LM, Klesges RC. The assessment of children's physical activity: a comparison of methods. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1987;19(5):511-7.
10. Northfield MR, Schmalzried TP, Belcher G, Amstutz HC. Quantitative assessment of activity in joint replacement patients. Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society; 1994 Feb 21-24, New Orleans, LA. Chicago: Orthopaedic Research Society; 1994. p. 80.
11. Sallis JF, Buono MJ, Roby JJ, Carlson D, J.A. N. The Caltrac accelerometer as a physical activity monitor for school-age children. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1990;22(5):698-703.
12. Washburn RA, Laporte RE. Assessment of walking behavior: effect of speed and monitor position on two objective physical activity monitors. Res Q Exerc Sport 1988;59(1):83-5.
13. Wong TC, Webster JG, Montoye HJ, Washburn R. Portable accelerometer device for measuring human energy expenditure. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1981;28(6):467-71.
14. Tryon WW. Activity measurement in psychology and medicine. In: Bellack AS, Hersen M, editors. Applied clinical psychology series. New York and London: Plenum Press; 1991.
15. Mason DJ, Redeker N. Measurement of activity. Nurs Res 1993;42(2):87-92.
16. Stewart CPU. Prosthetics use in amputees. Proceedings of the International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics V World Congress; 1986 Jun 29-Jul 4, Copenhagen, Denmark. Copenhagen, Denmark: International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics; 1986. p. 212.
17. Glaser RM, Heath MR, Brubaker CE, Hunt G, Wilson AB. A monitor for evaluating daily locomotor activity of prosthetic/orthotic device users. Proceedings of the International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics V World Congress; 1986 Jun 29-Jul 4, Copenhagen, Denmark. Copenhagen, Denmark: International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics; 1986. p. 290.
18. Day HJB. The assessment and description of amputee activity. Prosthet Orthot Int 1981;5:23-8.
19. Washburn R, Chin MK, Montoye HJ. Accuracy of pedometer in walking and running. Res Q Exerc Sport 1980;51(4):695-702.
20. Gayle R, Montoye HJ, Philpot J. Accuracy of pedometers for measuring distance walked. Res Q 1977;48:632-6.
21. Kochersberger G, McConnell E, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper C. The reliability, validity, and stabililty of a measure of physical activity in the elderly. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996;77(8):793-5.
22. Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz EW, Northfield MR, et al. Quantitative assessment of walking activity after total hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 1998;80-A(1):54-9.
23. Smith DG, Joseph AW, Boone DA, Borchers RE, Burgess EM. Patent: Gait Activity Monitor. Prosthetics Research Study, US Patent No. 5,485,402; 1996.
24. Powers CM, Toburn L, Perry J, Ayappa E. Influence of prosthetic foot design on sound limb loading in adults with unilateral below-knee amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75(7):825-9.
25. Chen PQ, Cheng CK, Shang HC, Wu IJ. Gait analysis after total knee replacement for degenerative arthritis. J Formos Med Assoc 1991;90(2):160-6.