A single Sensor-based Wearable System for Remote Six-Minute Walk Test
Hu, B.; Snghi, A.; Chomiak, T.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe six-minute walk test (6MWT) is a cornerstone measure of functional capacity, yet its standard corridor-based protocol demands a 30 m hallway, trained staff, and scripted encouragement. These logistical barriers limit accessibility and add cost. Efforts to overcome these limitations with smartphone sensors have fallen short: several studies report 8-40 percent under-estimation and a hard 500 m ceiling in the Apple Watch/iPhone algorithm. Dedicated inertial wearables, placed on a stable limb segment and sampled at high frequency, may achieve clinic-grade accuracy with few environment and logistical constraints. ObjectiveTo establish whether the Ambulosono thigh-mounted sensor provides equivalent time-scaled 6MWT distance in supervised and unsupervised environments, and to determine whether auditory cues--silence, American Thoracic Society (ATS) verbal encouragement, or rhythmic music--affect performance. MethodsSeventy-six healthy university students performed up to three 6MWTs in two settings: (1) a supervised 12 {+/-} 2 m indoor lane and (2) a self-selected 10-20 m route at home or on campus. Ambulosono recorded all-step walking distance, already rescaled to an exact six minutes by the accompanying mobile application. Duplicate trials within a Setting x Auditory-Condition cell were averaged, yielding 117 unique subject-records. Independent Welch t-tests compared structured and naturalistic distances within each auditory condition; effect size was expressed as Cohen d. Distance distributions were visualised with box-plots, over-laid histograms, and violin plots. Group means were benchmarked against contemporary reference values. ResultsScaled 6-min distance ranged from 388 to 481 m across the six Setting x Condition groups. Structured trials exceeded naturalistic trials by 37 m (music), 52 m (verbal), and 61 m (silent); however, none of these differences reached statistical significance (all p > 0.05; d [≤] 0.70) and all lay within Ambulosonos validated {+/-}5 percent systematic error band. Distance distributions overlapped almost completely. Every group mean fell inside the 400-520 m reference band reported for 18-to 25-year-old walking on 10-20 m lanes who have similar anthropomorphic features and ethic background. ConclusionsAfter rigorous time normalisation, Ambulosono delivers environment-independent 6MWT distance in healthy young adults and meets modern short-lane normative values. These findings support the use of dedicated wearables for remote functional-capacity monitoring and underscore the current limitations of smartphone-only solutions.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Validity and reliability of an app-based medical device to empower individuals in evaluating their physical capacities 96%
- Uneven terrain treadmill walking in younger and older adults 95%
- Comparison of raw accelerometry data from ActiGraph, Apple Watch, Garmin, and Fitbit using a mechanical shaker table 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Improved accuracy of the whole body Center of Mass position through Kalman filtering 91%
- Automatic approach-avoidance tendency toward physical activity, sedentary, and neutral stimuli as a function of age, explicit affective attitude, and intention to be active 90%
- Self-determination theory in physiotherapy practice: A rapid review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Feasibility characteristics of wrist-worn fitness trackers in health status monitoring for post-COVID patients in remote and rural areas 93%
- Population Analysis Of Mortality Risk: Predictive Models Using Motion Sensors For 100,000 Participants In The UK Biobank National Cohort 92%
- Use of assistive technology to assess distal motor function in subjects with neuromuscular disease 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.