Using Smart Socks to Detect Step-count at Slow Walking Speeds in Healthy Adults

View/ Open
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Balmain, Bryce Nicholas
Tuttle, Neil
Bailey, Joseph
Cheng, Katie
Duryea, Mitchell
Houlihan, Josephine
Wotherspoon, James
Morris, Norman
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2019
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
We examined the accuracy of Smart Socks - a device that measures foot pressure during gait for detecting step-count across various walking speeds. Thirty-six participants (17 men; 19 women) wore Smart Socks (Sock), a pedometer (Pedometer), and a smartphone with a commercially available Phone Application (Phone) pedometer to measure step-count during 3-min of treadmill or over-ground walking at 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, 3.8, and 4.7 km/h. Steps were compared to a gold-standard tally-counter (Count), collected by independent assessors. All devices (Sock, Pedometer, and Phone) underestimated step-count when compared to Count at 1.3 km/h ...
View more >We examined the accuracy of Smart Socks - a device that measures foot pressure during gait for detecting step-count across various walking speeds. Thirty-six participants (17 men; 19 women) wore Smart Socks (Sock), a pedometer (Pedometer), and a smartphone with a commercially available Phone Application (Phone) pedometer to measure step-count during 3-min of treadmill or over-ground walking at 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, 3.8, and 4.7 km/h. Steps were compared to a gold-standard tally-counter (Count), collected by independent assessors. All devices (Sock, Pedometer, and Phone) underestimated step-count when compared to Count at 1.3 km/h (p<0.05); however, Sock (27±18%) demonstrated a lower percent error compared to Phone (40±28%) and Pedometer (98±5%) (both p<0.01). At 2.2 km/h, Sock was not different compared to Count (Sock: 213±39; Count: 229±24 steps, p=0.25); however, both Phone (271±55 steps) and Pedometer (169±166 steps) were different compared to Count (p<0.05). At 3.0 km/h, both Sock (258±30 steps) and Pedometer (254±45 steps) were similar to Count (267±22 steps) (p>0.05); however, Phone (291±28 steps) overestimated step-count (p<0.01). All devices (Sock, Pedometer, and Phone) were similar to Count at 3.8, and 4.7 km/h (p>0.05). These findings demonstrate that Smart Socks are more accurate than pedometers used in the present study for detecting step-count during treadmill or over-ground ambulation at slower walking speeds.
View less >
View more >We examined the accuracy of Smart Socks - a device that measures foot pressure during gait for detecting step-count across various walking speeds. Thirty-six participants (17 men; 19 women) wore Smart Socks (Sock), a pedometer (Pedometer), and a smartphone with a commercially available Phone Application (Phone) pedometer to measure step-count during 3-min of treadmill or over-ground walking at 1.3, 2.2, 3.0, 3.8, and 4.7 km/h. Steps were compared to a gold-standard tally-counter (Count), collected by independent assessors. All devices (Sock, Pedometer, and Phone) underestimated step-count when compared to Count at 1.3 km/h (p<0.05); however, Sock (27±18%) demonstrated a lower percent error compared to Phone (40±28%) and Pedometer (98±5%) (both p<0.01). At 2.2 km/h, Sock was not different compared to Count (Sock: 213±39; Count: 229±24 steps, p=0.25); however, both Phone (271±55 steps) and Pedometer (169±166 steps) were different compared to Count (p<0.05). At 3.0 km/h, both Sock (258±30 steps) and Pedometer (254±45 steps) were similar to Count (267±22 steps) (p>0.05); however, Phone (291±28 steps) overestimated step-count (p<0.01). All devices (Sock, Pedometer, and Phone) were similar to Count at 3.8, and 4.7 km/h (p>0.05). These findings demonstrate that Smart Socks are more accurate than pedometers used in the present study for detecting step-count during treadmill or over-ground ambulation at slower walking speeds.
View less >
Journal Title
International Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume
40
Issue
2
Copyright Statement
© 2018 Georg Thieme Verlag. This is the author-manuscript version of the paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. The definitive version is available at www.thieme-connect.com
Subject
Mechanical engineering
Sports science and exercise